MURDERED: Joan Webster & Marie Iannuzzi

Every year, millions of people head into the wilderness searching for peace, beauty, and adventure. But hidden in those same scenic landscapes are stories of violence, survival, and lives cut short. I'm Delia D'Ambra, and on my podcast, Park Predators, I uncover the true crimes that happened in the most amazing places on Earth. Listen to Park Predators wherever you get your podcasts. Hi, Crime Junkies. I'm your host, Ashley Flowers. And I'm Britt. And this story is about what can happen when a case feels solved, even when it may not be. In Massachusetts, two women from very different worlds disappeared within a few years of each other. One was last seen leaving a bar. The other vanished after stepping out of Logan Airport. Police would eventually say that these two cases were connected and that they had found the man responsible. But after spending more than a year reporting on this case, interviewing witnesses, tracking down survivors, and reviewing thousands of pages of records, we found a story that doesn't sit quite right. And our question is, was the wrong man blamed for these crimes? And if so, then is the person or people who actually committed these murders still walking free? These are the stories of Joan Webster and Marie Iannuzzi. December 1st, 1981 is a Tuesday. The Tuesday after Thanksgiving break. And the day that Terry Webster really starts feeling anxious about not hearing from her youngest daughter, Joan. Their whole family had been together for the holiday weekend at their home in New Jersey. But instead of driving back to college in Massachusetts with her older sister as planned on Sunday, 25-year-old Joan left on Saturday night because she wanted to make it to a study group. So her dad booked her a flight to Boston Logan Airport. And she's at Harvard, I assume? Yeah, so she is in grad school there for architecture. And girl works hard, hence ending her break early just to go home and study, which is probably part of the reason Terry didn't stress out at first when she didn't hear from her daughter on Sunday. Like, you know, that's study group day. She's busy, yeah. Whatever, yeah. Didn't hear from her on Monday. Maybe she's just getting settled. But still not hearing a word from her by Tuesday morning, now she knows something is up. And almost at the same time Terry's starting to spiral, the phone rings. It's one of Joan's friends from Harvard, and right away Terry knows something is wrong because the friend tells her that Joan missed that Sunday study group and she didn't show up to class on Monday either. So Terry hangs up and calls Joan's older sister. So she lives close to campus and Terry asks her to go check Joan's dorm room. But what her sister finds doesn't ease anyone's concerns. I mean, before she even goes into Joan's room, she sees notes on her door from friends. And inside there is unopened mail and no sign that Joan's even been in the room since before break. Now, Terry is the one to file a missing persons report that same day. And by the next morning, Joan's family has their first clue. Because a call comes into Joan's dad's office from a fisherman. Apparently, he was walking near the marshes in Saugus, Massachusetts, which is like six miles north of Logan Airport. And the guy says he found Joan's wallet on the riverbank. And inside was a driver's license, credit cards, no cash though. But there was this like card instructing whoever finds the wallet to call Joan's dad's office. So they call him, he calls the police. And when they hear about this, they're worried right away. Because this marsh area where her stuff was found, it is a known dumping ground. Like for trash, for stolen stuff, and for bodies. So they go out to meet this fisherman and they search the area. And not too far from where he had found the wallet, they find Joan's red leather pocketbook with her checkbook inside. And this is a bad sign. Because of the location, because of how the items were scattered, police wonder if someone could have thrown Joan's things out the window of a moving car as they passed on this highway. It runs right over this area. And if that's what happened, finding Joan and whoever took her might be even harder than anyone thought. Because they're now four days out from anyone last seeing her. And who knows where she could be now? I mean, at least they know that she made it onto her flight and to the Boston area. Oh, for her stuff to be there. Yeah, exactly. And they focus a lot of their attention and early searches around the airport specifically and that marsh area. And they really do pull out all the stops. We're talking officers, dogs, helicopters, even scuba divers to comb the river by the marsh. But there is no sign of Joan or anything else. And is the marsh area like on the way to campus from the airport? Is it like on that route? No, that's the thing. So this is like in the complete opposite direction. Oh. Which is what I think makes people even more certain that if someone intercepted Joan, it was more likely at the airport than anywhere else. because they also start finding witnesses who say that they saw her there. Passengers on the flight confirm that Joan definitely made it onto the plane. They say she seemed relaxed for like the whole flight, which landed at Logan Airport around 10.30 p.m. And then a few Harvard students who flew that same day tell police they saw Joan in the terminal too. One friend even remembers talking to her at baggage claim. Joan had this like carry-on tote. She had her purse, but she was also waiting on a bag, this like dark suitcase with unique striping. Now when the bag comes, she just grabbed it and headed out to ground transportation. And she told at least one person at the airport that she planned to take a cab straight to her dorm, which is what her family knew her plan to be too. Her dad had even given her 70 bucks in cash for the cab ride back to her dorm. So Joan walking to the exit is the last confirmed sighting of her by anyone who knew her. But the best lead that police get is actually from someone who doesn't even know her at all. Sometime in the first week of the investigation, this cab driver comes forward and says that around 10.45 p.m. that night, a woman matching Joan's description came up to his cab outside the terminal, like knocked on his window, and asked Cambridge. Right? That's where Harvard is. Feels a lot like Joan. Yeah. But the woman wasn't alone. According to the driver, an older man was with her. Not like old, old, but like older than the 25-year-old Joan, right? And the driver thought maybe this guy's like in his 40s. He's a white guy, about 5'7", with curly hair and a beard. And he was wearing these like round glasses, which is like, I think, pretty common for the time. Now, this matches no one that Joan's family claims to know. But the driver said that the woman seemed to know this guy. Like they felt like familiar. Yeah, or the woman who we think is Joan. But here's where things start to get really weird. So this driver's like, yep, Cambridge, I got you. And the driver goes to help them start loading their luggage into the trunk. He goes to pick up the guy's suitcase, and it is super heavy. And, like, he doesn't know this gig, right? Like, we're all flirting with the bad weight limit. But this was something else. So he makes a comment to the guy about how heavy the suitcase was. And all of a sudden, the man gets really aggressive. He told the driver he didn't like the way that he was handling his luggage. And he told the woman, you know what, we don't even need this cab after all. So he pulls the luggage back out of the trunk and leads her away toward another cab, this blue one. And this cab driver just kind of like watches as they drive off in this blue car. So this wasn't like someone grabbing her and forcing her into a car. No. This is presumably another passenger, maybe even like another student, if they were both going to take a cab together to Cambridge. Could be. Or at least somebody who worked at the college or was affiliated with it in some way. His age is what makes me think you've got to, like, broaden the scope. But yeah, like, someone going where she was going. And it's not like she had to bum a ride. Like, she had her own money. She, like, could get her own cab. So if this was Joan, it seems to me like this guy was someone she recognized from the school or someone she planned to meet up with. But that's the catch. This is the last possible sighting of Joan. If that was her, why hasn't that man come forward? For that matter, why hasn't the cab driver who took them come forward? Wait, they never found the other cab driver, like the one that was like in a blue car? Nope. The guy who saw them get into the car. The original cab driver. Yeah, he couldn't tell which company that cab was with or who was driving it. Just that the cab was like blue in color. Did Joan say anything about meeting anyone when she was home? No. I know a guy that she was seeing planned to visit her over Thanksgiving break and they ended up canceling. But like her parents knew about that guy like that didn't seem like a big deal. Also, that guy was closer to her age, wouldn't be mistaken for 40 something like this other guy. And I assume no one else they know fits this 40 something year old guy's description. Well, I don't know for sure because the strangest thing happens. So police take this account from the cab driver seriously enough to make a composite sketch of the man described. But as far as we can tell, that sketch was never publicly released. We actually spoke to one of Joan's professors and even other students who were at Harvard at the time with Joan. None of them knew that this sketch even existed all these years later. Yeah. And it's not really clear why. But Joan's professor told us that early on, it felt to him like police just assumed that Joan left and that she was going to come back on her own eventually. Which, like, I don't even know where that assumption comes from. Because to me, all of the signs right from the jump are pointing to some kind of foul play. Like, it's not like they were hearing things from, like, the family that would make them think she walked away. Everyone who actually knew Joan didn't believe that for a second. They know that she's a good student. She was a resident advisor. She's super responsible. And look at how you found her stuff. Like, why would she walk away and dump her stuff in this marshy area off of an overpass? Exactly. I don't know if it was ignorance, if it was negligence or something else entirely. But there is something so wrong about the way this investigation was run. Like I said, we spoke to one of Joan's professors and they told us that police were coming around at first. They were meeting with students. They were meeting with faculty. They were not showing them the sketch. Not showing them the sketch. Yeah, to see if they recognized this man who also wanted to go to Cambridge. But also, they were telling everyone that interviews are happening. They were telling everyone that leads are being followed. But here is the wild thing. During one of these meetings where they were talking to people and bringing people together, they caught the officers in a straight-up lie. So police are in this meeting. They're saying they're interviewing everyone. They're specifically saying that they've interviewed everyone who was on Joan's flight. But then someone in the room was like, um, hi, I was on Joan's flight and you never talked to me. Oh. Like egg on the face, right? Yeah. But even if this was like a simple slip up, it was a big one. Like if investigators missed someone that obvious, it raises a bigger question. What else could they be missing? So this is why when Joan's classmates start getting the feeling that police think she just like ran away on her own, they get right to work. They start calling newsrooms all over New England. They contact local papers. They work the phones nonstop. They're passing out flyers. They're just trying to keep Joan's story in the public eye. It would have been real nice to include a suspect sketch in those appeals to the public. For the life of me, I cannot figure out why this wasn't widely distributed. I mean, or distributed at all, widely or not. Even if you don't want to call this guy a suspect, even if you think there is a chance that that might not even have been Joan until you can say who it was. We found this guy. We talked to him. We know it's not him. And we know that wasn't Joan or whatever. Like, I feel you have to show it. Like, you have to find the guy who has this unusually heavy suitcase, last seen with a woman who looked like your missing person. But they don't seem to do anything to find that guy. Instead, most of the press pickup just features Joan's family, who by this point have flown to Boston themselves to help out with searches and speak to the press. By January, even with a $10,000 reward offered for any information, no one knows where Joan could be. She and all of her luggage are still missing. But little did anyone know, Joan's luggage had actually been hiding in plain sight since just hours after she walked off that plane. And where it's found could be the biggest clue in this case. Love listening to Crime Junkie and wish you could put these investigations on the big screen? We've got exciting news. Crime Junkie is now streaming on Tubi. That's right. You can experience the stories you can't stop thinking about alongside Ashley and Britt in a whole new way. It's the same deep dives, the same unforgettable cases, and the same original reporting. Now streaming on Tubi. On January 29th, 1982, police get word that Jones' missing luggage has been found. but in the strangest of places. Her suitcase is found at a Greyhound bus terminal in downtown Boston. This is around five miles from both Harvard and the airport and about 10 miles from that marsh area where her wallet and purse was found. And this is how they find it. So this employee was working at the bus terminal, said that they found the suitcase when going through all of like the lost and unclaimed luggage that they had in their storage. Basically, it was their job to take everything that had been sitting there, like piling up for a while. And they were supposed to take it to a warehouse in New York. Now, I don't know how they made the connection for sure, but I assume that there was like, you know, those tags or whatever. And that they recognized her name from the news because they knew to call police when they came across her back. And what police learned when they have the facility really dig into their records is that the locker that her suitcase was found in was rented about 12 hours after Joan's flight landed. So like right around 1030 in the morning on Sunday. Now, those temporary lockers are rented for 24 hours. So the way it works is basically like when the time is up and no one came back for it. Like the locker gets open. You take the stuff out of it. It goes into storage or whatever. Right. Where it had been sitting for two months. And does anybody remember who rented that locker by chance? From the records, it doesn't seem like it. But I don't think this is a place where you like go and like pay someone. And it was one of those places where you like go and you just like put 50 cents in and you like get a little key and you come back for it. If you're not back in 24 hours, the lock basically turns to red. Employees know that they can use their master key to open it, take all the unclaimed stuff out. And if it's Joan who rented it, that doesn't make sense because we know she planned to go straight to campus from the airport. Also, why store your suitcase but then like toss your purse in your wallet? And was this like her big checked luggage, like the one with the stripes or was it her carry on? It was the checked one. The carry-on actually has never been found. Oh. So, I mean, I guess you could make an argument that, like, if this was her, wherever she's going, she's just, like, traveling light. Okay, but why check the bag and just, like, not ditch it once you get to wherever you need it? Yeah. Like, I don't understand why you take it, you take the checked bag to, like, a storage area in general. And then you're, like, again, tossing the wallet and purse. Yeah. Right. And this is like the weird thing, too, is like it doesn't seem like anything was taken from the checked luggage. Like all of her clothes are still in it. So someone else had to have checked it in at the bus terminal. You would think. But why? Why run the risk of being spotted? Just like dump it somewhere. Burn it. Like, I mean, like, yeah, this clue is so confounding to me because like, did they want to keep this for some reason? But then they couldn't come back for it because there was too much publicity around Joan's case by then. Or is this some kind of like sick game they were playing, hoping that someone would find it half a century later and reporters and podcasters would be speculating about what it means? Like, I think what really gets me is that Joan wasn't reported missing for a few days, right? Right. It was like Tuesday and this was checked on Sunday morning. Yes. They could have gotten it by like Monday morning. That's what I'm saying. So someone, Joan or someone else, they would have had time to anonymously come back, get the stuff, even if they had to go ask staff for it. Nobody knows Joan is missing in that first 24 hours, like before the locker turns to red. But no one comes back for it. So if you're trying to get rid of the luggage, again, why not just dump it with the wallet and purse? Why not just dump it in your house? Or dump it like the wallet and purse, not even in the same area. Yeah. Trying to like figure out the plan or like the logic behind this like it makes my head spin And it why I keep coming back to like this was some kind of game And in the end this mysterious clue doesn actually bring police any closer to what happened to Joan. And they do even try testing the luggage for print and get some, but without anyone to compare them to like back in the day, like it doesn't mean much. So despite having local, state and federal authorities all circling this case and following leads, each working off of slightly different theories, nothing is paying off. But then, like manna from the heavens, that same year, in 1982, the Suffolk County Assistant District Attorney, this guy Tim Burke, he's the one who is assigned Jones' case. He gets this out-of-the-blue call about a totally different case that changes the trajectory of Jones. Now, this call ADA Burke gets isn't even about a case in his jurisdiction. The woman's calling from the next county over, hoping that someone in the DA's office in Boston can give her the help that she isn't getting on her sister's case. And her sister is Marie Iannuzzi. She was murdered about three years before Joan, but her case has never been solved. And listen, she doesn't even know if she's calling the right guy, but someone suggested to her like she'd just try. And her ask is simple when she calls the ADA. Will you at least take a look and help me, please? So even though it's kind of a side quest, the ADA does a preliminary look into Marie. And so he has the lead detective in her case walk him through some of the basics. And as they did, both of them were struck by one aspect of the investigation. Marie's body was found in that same marshy area where Joan's things were dumped. And I don't know if it was just that one detail or if they got further in, but pretty quickly, ADA Burke has kind of married this random case that he got a call about to the white whale case that he is already working. Maybe they're connected. And from that point on, that becomes almost like fact. And I want to pause here because the way that this case, this story gets told, even now, says a lot about who gets centered and who doesn't. Joan was a wealthy Harvard student who got immediate attention from the media and from the public and from powerful people who made noise. Marie was working class. She was from East Boston. She didn't have an Ivy League school behind her or a dad in the CIA. Whoa, wait. Joan's dad was in the CIA. Yeah. So, like, the big guns were on her case. And I think that's part of why it got so much attention. But while Joan's case had been everywhere, Marie's case only got attention because of Joan's. And even then, it sort of faded into the background. And they're just connected because of this, like, known dumping ground area. Well, that's the thing that grabs Burke's attention, right? 88 Burke, but there is another big thing that actually links the two forever. But let me lay out a little bit more about Marie's case so you'll hopefully see what they did. 20-year-old Marie Iannuzzi's last day was Saturday, August 11, 1979. Again, this is three years before Joan. That was her dad's birthday. And Marie's sister told us that they grew up in East Boston in this like big, close-knit Italian family. And even though their parents tried to shelter their kids, like they'd really been through a lot. Like Marie's brother had actually been murdered too in like a totally unrelated way. But Marie was still trusting and loved to have fun. So she wasn't suspicious of the world around her. And nothing about the day that Marie died tells me that she thought she was in danger. She spent the morning with her parents. And after, Marie went with her boyfriend David to his cousin's wedding. Now at the reception, David ripped his pants, which is like, what good wedding reception doesn't have ripped pants? But he at that point was like, I want to go home. But Marie wanted to go to this after party at the groom's family's house. So her and David end up having this argument about this. Witnesses we talked to who were at the wedding didn't describe anything violent, just this like disagreement. David ends up leaving and Marie finds a ride to go to this after party. This is like around 5.30 that evening. Now by 10, the after party was winding down. So another guest named Candy agreed to take Marie home. But on the way, Marie asked Candy to just drop her off at a bar instead one near Logan Airport, which Candy did at around 10.30 p.m. Then Candy went back to the after party where her boyfriend Lenny was waiting for her. Now, at some point, I guess Marie had supposedly left some things in Candy's car. And so Candy and or Lenny delivered those things back to Marie at the bar. And there were like two separate trips where they saw her. And the last time was after midnight. So it would now be August 12th. And that was their story, at least. Lenny says that the last time he ran in to give her a set of keys, he offered to give her a ride home, but she said no because she was meeting someone. He said they walked out of the bar. He went to the car where Candy was waiting. And Marie walked around the corner. And that is the last that he saw of her. And a girlfriend who had met up with Marie at the bar backs some of this up. She says that Marie was like making a phone call right before Lenny showed up for the last time. And as Lenny was leaving, so was Marie. But Marie told this friend not to leave because she was going to be right back in like 30 minutes. Though this friend's like, you know, I don't know where she was going. It wasn't totally clear. But this woman confirmed that she saw Marie walk out of the bar, same as Lenny, but then she never came back. That was the last they saw of her. So her family reported her missing quickly, but it was already too late because a day later, on August 13th, that's when her body was discovered in the marshy area behind this lobster company. Now, when she's found, she's fully clothed with all of her jewelry on. The only thing missing were her shoes and stockings, which were never found. But everything else was in place, even her bodysuit that she was wearing. Now, an autopsy determined that she died from ligature strangulation probably about 12 hours before her body was found. And there were signs of a struggle, bruises and scrapes like on her face and her arms, her legs. And the medical examiner said there were no clear signs of sexual assault. But it was obvious that there had been some kind of sexual activity between the night that she went missing and when she was killed because the Emmy found sperm after doing a vaginal smear. So after she's found, like in the first, like, you know, early days of this case, there were basically two suspects. And that was Marie's boyfriend, David, and Lenny. But investigators had quickly zeroed in on Lenny. Right. I mean, he is the last person seen with Marie. He would have known the marsh area because turns out he's a fisherman by trade, actually sold fish to the very lobster company near where she's found. And Lenny had a pretty long rap sheet, including the abduction of a 16-year-old girl and attempted rape of a college student that he offered to drive home. Now, he served prison time for that second crime. And Burke told us that to him, past behavior, especially sexual violence against women, is one of the best indicators of future behavior. He thinks Lenny got bolder in his crimes as the years went on. And that his psychology lined up with the type of murder or murderer in Marie's case. A murder that was sexually motivated. Now, when police originally interviewed Lenny and Candy, their stories stood out to them. I mean, they both had the same story, that when Lenny and Marie walked out together, Candy was waiting in the car. Lenny offered Marie a ride home, but she said no, she's meeting someone, and she walks off around the corner. But police noted that, like, Lenny and Candy's stories matched up almost too perfectly. Like, the case file says word for word. I mean, I get what they're like wink, wink, nudge, nudging at here. But if their stories didn't match, I think that would look bad, too. Right? Totally. Again, I think it's like the word for word part. Like to them, it seemed rehearsed, I guess. And in the report, it says that Candy was really nervous, like she was shaking when she talked to the police. Now, she'd been with Lenny for around eight years since she was 18. And people we talked to who knew them said that she would do anything for this guy. And he would push her to do a lot because guess who was his alibi witness for the attempted rape case that he ended up being convicted of? Candy. Candy. Problem is, there was nothing here in Marie's case to disprove their story and nothing else to really go off of. So the case went cold for nearly three years, which brings me back to 1982 and this call from Marie's sister to ADA Burke. So now that he has gotten up to speed on the details of Marie's case, and he's wondering if he could be looking for the same perp, he goes to Joan's case file looking to see if there's anything that might tie Lenny to her disappearance. And sure enough, what do you know? Burke learns that a tip had come in January that ties everything together for him. Love listening to Crime Junkie and wish you could put these investigations on the big screen? We've got exciting news. Crime Junkie is now streaming on Tubi. That's right. You can experience the stories you can't stop thinking about alongside Ashley and Britt in a whole new way. It's the same deep dives, the same unforgettable cases, and the same original reporting. Now streaming on Tubi. In January of 1982, a week before they found Joan's luggage, a woman had called police to tell them about this scary incident that she had with a man years before. She never reported it. And admittedly, there are plenty of differences, right? But when she heard about the circumstances of Joan's disappearance on the news, she felt like she needed someone to know about this thing that happened to her. Our reporter, Malika Dhaliwal, actually tracked this tipster down back in 2025 so we could hear her story firsthand. And this woman claimed that years before Joan disappeared, when she was in her 20s, she had been out at a club one night, and this guy that she knew from her neighborhood was there. And when she was going to leave, he convinced her to give him a ride, saying that he was, like, sick, he needed help getting to the hospital. But once she was in the car, he told her to go somewhere else, like somewhere out by the water. And when she realized that they weren't going to the hospital, he pulled out a gun and tried to assault her. Now, she said that she was able to talk her way out of this situation, reminding him that people had seen them leave together. So, like, they knew she would be with him. But she said this was the most terrifying moment of her life. And she just could not shake this overwhelming sense when she saw Joan's story on the news. Like, what if it was him? What if he wised up over the years, went after someone that, first of all, he wasn't as closely tied to? And no one could, like, confirm that he had been with another person that night. At a place, right, the airport, where so many people are coming and going, they might not remember who left with whom. And here's the real thing that made her sure she had to call police. She'd heard rumors that the guy who pulled a gun on her was now driving a cab around Logan Airport. Not through a company or anything, just kind of like picking up rides unlicensed. So that is what made her pick up the phone and give police the man's name. Leonard Lenny Paradiso. Now that tip didn't seem to go anywhere at the time. But now that ADA Burke sees it, it means everything. Everything. This is the same Lenny from Marie's case. So he kind of strong arms his way into Marie's case and takes over, even though it's outside of his jurisdiction. Because if he wants to get Lenny, he has a much better chance of nailing him for Marie's homicide, mostly because Joan's case isn't a homicide. They still haven't found her. So he throws himself into that one. And listen, this isn't a slam dunk by any means. It's mostly circumstantial. Even the car that Candy and Lenny say that they drove that night is long gone. Was it a blue car by chance? No, it wasn't. And it doesn't even matter. I highly doubt he even had the same car years later when Joan went missing because over the last like three or four years, Lenny and Candy reported eight cars and like two boats stolen, damaged or sunk for basically insurance claims. So I don't think it was the same one blue or not, but it wasn't blue. I know that. Now, one of the things that Burke finds to help his case is a set of notes from Lenny's parole officer. According to the notes, on August 13th, 1979, at around noon, this would have been a few hours after Marie's body was ID'd, Lenny told his parole officer that he was worried about police questioning him about her. Which is, like, not something I worry about when a body turns up. Same, but I mean, I might be if I was the one last seen with her or seen with her the day before. I mean, it's not like it's some random person. He had a connection to her. So I don't know. Of everything that Burks got against Lenny, this is kind of like the least concerning to me. Now, there is one problem standing in the way of bringing charges against Lenny. And that is David. Which is Marie's boyfriend. Yeah. A good defense attorney would offer up the boyfriend. Obviously. Right. Like, remember, he was an early suspect. They were fighting that night. He still hadn't been ruled out. And actually, there was a lot of suspicious stuff around him too. Like I said, according to police reports, David and Marie argued the day that she's last seen alive. Apparently, she was seeing someone else. So there was motive there too. And he had been abusive to her. He'd even strangled her just a few months earlier. And it left her so scared that she moved out of his place and stayed with a friend. Not to mention, the morning after that wedding they were at together, David called Marie's family saying that she didn't come home and asking if she was with them. And that even struck them as odd because he didn't usually check in like that. Ultimately, ADA Burke decides to put this all to a grand jury. And he does this in March of 1982. He's going to present what they have in Marie's case and let them decide whether to bring charges against David or Lenny. And in his opinion, David was a sympathetic witness. He answers every question. He owns up to what he did. And he claims that he cried for Marie when he was alone. And most importantly, according to Burke, David didn't have any connection to where Marie's body was found. But Lenny did. Again, he sold fish to that lobster company. And I guess the grand jury agrees because they chose to indict Lenny. And on July 6th, 1982, he's arrested for Marie's murder and remains locked away until his trial is set to begin. And that time between arrest and trial proves to be invaluable for ADA Burke. Because an inmate named Robert Bond comes forward in early 83. And he tells Burke that Lenny had been doing some talking in jail. Bond said he got close to Lenny when he was moved into the same jail cell as him. And they'd actually served time together at the same prison before. And they got so close that Bond claims Lenny confessed not to just one murder, but two. Both Marie's and Jones. In a letter to Burke, Bond writes that Lenny told him that he drove back to the bar Marie was at without Candy and convinced Marie to get in Candy's car by telling her he needed to pick Candy up. But instead, he drives her to the marshes, sexually assaults her, and he says that during a struggle, Marie scratched Lenny. And so he made this, like, specific comment that he didn't want investigators scraping under her fingernails for skin cells. Now, as for Joan, Bond claims that Lenny told him that on the night Joan disappeared, he was doing his unofficial cab thing, picked her up at Logan Airport after she got off her flight. And Bond says that Lenny claimed he told Joan he needed to stop by his office to like pick up some papers or something and that after that he'd take her to Cambridge. But he didn't. He drove Joan to this pier where he kept his boat, the Malla Femena, which means evil woman in Italian. And Bond says that Lenny took Joan onto the boat, offered her a drink, and when she said no and rejected him, he hits her in the head, specifically on the right side of the head with a whiskey bottle, and sexually assaulted her. And that is when he took the boat way out and dumped her body in the water. So he tells investigators that Lenny claimed there was a lot of blood on the boat after this, and so two days later, he took the boat out again and just sank it. Bond says that Lenny showed him pictures of the boat on his, like, wall that they had. And he said there were two. There's a smaller one and there's a larger one. And the larger one is the one that he sank. He even describes the registration numbers. And this all feels like ultra and provable if it true Yeah And so around this time another inmate comes forward and backs up Bond statements He claims that Lenny confessed to him too. So if investigators can find this sunken boat, they might have a real case. Yeah. So in the summer of 83, Jones' parents announced this reward for any tips that'll lead to its location. And investigators are searching the harbor. They're bringing in divers. and it takes till September 27th. But that's when they find the Mala Femenna. They raise it from its watery grave, but there's no evidence found. Now, I don't think this makes anyone believe the story isn't true. I mean, like, the thing's been underwater for almost a year at this point. Like, I don't know that you would still see a bloody crime scene. So, unfortunately, without anything to strengthen Joan's case, Burke has to, like, just focus on getting justice for Marie. and Lenny's trial for her murder begins on July 9th, 1984. By then, Burke had secured another inmate who says that Lenny confessed to them. So even though he doesn't have any physical evidence, he argues that the similarities and consistencies between those two informants who came for it, between their stories, he says like because they're so similar, it makes them more credible. So did they end up not doing anything with the vaginal smear from her case? So on the stand, the lead detective says that the slide wasn't refrigerated. And when the bodysuit was tested, there was no, like, seminal residue on that. So that was all a bust. Wait, did they ever test her fingernails then? Because isn't that what Lenny told Bond he didn't want them to do? No, they didn't, which for me would have been, like, the first thing. To go straight to the fingernails. Yeah, but for some reason they didn't. I don't know if they just, like, thought they didn't need it or what, but they don't test that. And maybe they were right, because on July 21st, the jury comes back with a verdict, and Lenny is found guilty of second-degree murder in the death of Marie Iannuzzi. He's also convicted of assault with intent to rape and sentenced to life in prison. And for Marie's family, there is relief, but it is complicated, because while there's a conviction, they can't help walking away feeling a little used. because the way it all played out, they never really felt like it was about Marie. They always felt like Marie's case was just a way to get Joan justice. Like a stepping stone. It wasn't justice for Marie. It was justice to find Joan justice. Yeah, like they could use this to put this guy away while they look for the smoking gun in the case that like really mattered to them all along. Now, ADA Burke told us that Marie's trial focused on her case and he avoided bringing Joan's case into that trial. Beyond like the cross examinations involving Lenny's girlfriend or whatever. But still, that's how Marie's sister feels. And that's like a pretty yucky feeling to walk away with. It is, right? And I don't know if it's the trial she's just talking about or even the fact of like how, like the fact that the case got taken on at all. Yeah. But I agree. Like that's what, that was their experience walking away. And that's a terrible feeling. And like I said, complicated. Like would her sister do anything differently? No, probably not. Because Marie had long been forgotten like altogether before this. but it still sucks. And at the end of this, it's not really like they got Joan total justice because Joan's family is kind of in limbo. And no amount of media coverage or attention from the prosecutor's office is changing things. They're basically told that until we have a body, we have nothing. So that is the thing they have to hope for now. But everyone knows that chances are slim. I mean, per the confession, Joan is like out at sea somewhere. And the reality is they may never be able to properly lay her to rest. And I don't know if that reality gets harder or easier to accept as time goes on. But I imagine either way, their world gets flipped upside down when Joan is found in April of 1990. And not in deep waters or washed up ashore. where she's found calls into question the entire confession that their theory has hinged on for the last eight years. Love listening to Crime Junkie and wish you could put these investigations on the big screen? We've got exciting news. Crime Junkie is now streaming on Tubi. That's right. You can experience the stories you can't stop thinking about alongside Ashley and Britt in a whole new way. It's the same deep dives, the same unforgettable cases, and the same original reporting. Now streaming on Tubi. Jones' remains end up being found by a woman walking her dog in Hamilton, Massachusetts. Now, she initially spotted what she thought was this deflated volleyball in a drainage ditch, but it was a human skull. And after an extensive search by police, they end up locating more bones and a shallow grave buried beneath a pile of logs. Dental records are what confirm that it is Joan that they found. And it's so weird because there were at least two layers of logs and debris that were laid on top of her body at two different times. Which means someone's been like coming back and checking on these. Making sure that she stayed hidden. Now, the glaringly obvious thing here is that Joan, in fact, had not been dumped in the ocean off a boat like Robert Bond said Lenny confessed to. But I will say there is a large fracture on the right side of her skull. Which does match what Bond said. Right. Was that a lucky guess? Was Bond lying? Did Lenny lie to Bond? I don't know. What I think is so interesting is the area where she's found and what that could tell us. Hamilton is about an hour northeast of Logan Airport. The marsh area where her purse and wallet were found is like in that general direction. Oh. So it could make sense that someone dumped those things as they were driving to Hamilton. And someone, Lenny or otherwise, clearly had this Hamilton, this like specific place in mind. because where she was found was this quiet rural road that winds through the woods. I mean, there are houses, but it's like the kind of road that locals use because they live there or because someone knows it well enough to feel okay stopping there without being seen. You have to know this. You have to go out of your way to find it. Because you also know that you can have time to dig a shallow grave, right? Come back and nobody's going to spot you. You're not going to be seen. But here's what's really odd. we found out that there was a massive fire in the area around the marshes that caused roadblocks and evacuations on the night that Joan went missing. So, like, even getting to that place would not have been an easy path. I mean, it clearly didn't stop someone, though. No, but I think my question is, like, was that someone really Lenny? The location of Joan's body doesn't seem to change much for investigators, though. Like, or for ADA Burke. I mean, it changes his plan, probably. Like, he can't take this to trial because the only thing he had to go on were the stories from these jailhouse informants. Which don't match. No, but like, oh well. In his mind, the case is already closed. Now they've at least found her. I mean, truthfully, people probably could have seen this coming because he seemed to be disregarding anything he considered bad facts along the line. Bad facts being those things that didn't fit his, like, Lenny did it theory. I mean, at one point, it's realized that the night Joan went missing was super stormy by, like, the harbor. Like, there's no way anyone could have gone out on a boat that night. And Burke had to even publicly admit that. Also, plot twist, Lenny didn't even have his boat when Joan went missing. What do you mean he didn't have his boat? And this is what I'm saying. So they were, like, disregarding the stuff before Joan's even found. He told investigators this early on. he said that the rudder was broken and it had sank. He even filed an insurance claim like he was known to do for it. And court records for a federal bankruptcy trial show that the judge in the case believed that the boat was sunk by August of 1981. This is months before Joan went missing. But, like, was it actually, though? Because insurance claims on cars and boats and things, like, that was kind of his racket with candy, right? Yeah. But when they recovered his boat, like, the story lined up. The rudder was broken, just like he said, and it was found right where he said it would be. And either way, we know nothing is actually found on the boat. Like it's like finding the boat is like, OK, cool. It doesn't even matter. Because now everyone agrees that he didn't kill her on the boat. So they say like, oh, so sorry, we got that part wrong. But everything else is still right. OK, what is everything else, though? No one can really say for sure. But Burke continues to publicly insist that Lenny is responsible for Jones' murder, even though he's never been charged. Honestly, this insistence might help explain why the suspect sketch in Jones' case never became more publicly tied to the case. I mean, it doesn't explain to me like the first month or so. Like the initial searches and interviews and stuff. But after they lock in on Lenny, it feels like they just, like, write this guy off completely because it, like, it doesn't look like Lenny, right? Sketch is a white guy, curly hair, beard, 5'7". He was in his 40s. Lenny is 6'2". He's heavyset, didn't have curly hair, didn't wear glasses. Like, dude's a hard guy to miss. He could have been the other cab driver, though. Maybe, but even that gets a little murky when you dig in. So the tipster who called and had that bad experience with Lenny told us that she heard word on the street was that he was driving that unlicensed cab, right? We couldn't find any evidence of that. When he picked up the hitchhiker that he assaulted, he didn't introduce himself as a cab driver. And in Bond's statements, he never claims that Lenny drove a cab either. Wait, then what's the story of how he got Joan in his car? Just that Lenny picked her up at the airport. But he doesn't specifically say like he was driving a cab or pretended to be a cab driver or whatever. As far as I can tell, he didn't really give other specifics around that. And like it is a big question for me, too. Like, well, how would Lenny get her in the car? But I don't think anyone is pressing him for those details. So I don't know. OK, so say Lenny was doing this like unmarked cab thing. There's something that just I cannot make sense. Her luggage. Like if he's pretending to be a cab driver, I don't think he convinces her to check her luggage or like gets out and does it and leaves her in the car. Like that would have been an instant red flag. It would have been. And like here's I mean, we know whoever checked it didn't do it right away. Right. Like it happened the next day at 1030 a.m. So theoretically, like one scenario could be like someone picks up Joan. They kill her either in Hamilton or then they take her thereafter. and whether she's already buried or not, her luggage is driven back, like back south to downtown Boston and then left at the station. Or Joan is still alive at 1030 and she did it for some unknown, inexplicable reason. And if that's the case, then she's not with Lenny. Like she had zero ties to this man. He would have been a stranger to her. So I think, I really believe someone else did it. And the more I think about it, I keep coming back. I think whoever did it wanted it to be found, but maybe not to play with people. Maybe they wanted it to look like Joan was like caught a bus somewhere. Like, think about it. Like earlier I said that her wallet could have easily been tossed on the way to Hamilton. But what if it was on the way back? Like, say Joan's killed in Hamilton. Just like ditch her stuff, right? Why drive all the way back? And if you're going to, why not put all her stuff together? They separate the purse and the wallet from the luggage because that kind of makes it look like she took those things with her. And why would you need to make it look like she took off if you have zero ties to her? If you knew her. Especially if you were last seen with her. Wait, didn't you say they got fingerprints from her suitcase? Like, do we know who those are? Oh, so here's another thing. Those are not Lenny's. They tested him against those right away in 1982. Not a match. I don't know if they've ever been entered into a modern database. We would have loved to ask, but the Essex County District Attorney's Office didn't respond to our requests for comment. But I know they tested them against at least one other person over the years. But whoever that was, that wasn't a match either. I mean, I say start there, right? Like, it seems like it could be pretty freaking important. Could be. I mean, like, at the same time, it also came from an airport where it's being handled by other people. A stranger could have touched it thinking it was their bag. Like, it might not be the thing. And even, like, someone put it in the locker, but then someone had to take it out of the locker, put it into storage, and they were sorting it in storage to put into further storage. And that's where I'm like, I pray to God they, like, checked the people who worked at the Greyhound bus or whatever. But, like, I don't know. Like, even if we, yes, it might not be connected, but, like, that sure feels like something. But also it could be. Yeah, it feels like something you want to, like, know or rule out. Did they get anything usable when they found her remains? Like, was there anything other than her remains with her? By that point, it had been so long, I don't think they got much. I mean, I know there were, like, a few hairs found at the scene. But, like, I mean, those may have been Jones. We couldn't confirm if those have ever even been tested. I mean, it was 1990 when she was found. And they had a suspect. So they didn't compare the hair to Lenny, even? Oh, no, they did that. It wasn't his. That's why, like, that's why the answer is like, could be Jones. Yeah, probably Jones. Yeah. So it's like giving tunnel vision for me. Yeah. Like, I assume no one's racing to exhume her to see if there is anything else they could use. I don't think they would be. I mean, again, but there is not even an option to do that because after Joan's body was found, her family quietly and quickly cremated her, which actually technically is illegal. I was actually about to say that, like, because the case is open. Yeah, it's technically still open. And according to Massachusetts law, you can't cremate a body that's part of an open investigation. And listen, I don't say that to insinuate anything shady. They had been grieving her loss for a very long time. Like, they probably didn't even know that. But it seems like something the investigator who was working on her case should have known. But I think they were so set on their theory that, like, when they're like, we're going to have her cream, nobody stopped them. Does Joan's family believe that it was Lenny? Well, we couldn't talk to any of her immediate family. So her parents have passed and we reached out to her siblings, but they haven't gotten back to us. The person we were able to talk to, though, was Joan's former sister-in-law, Eve. So she was married to Joan's brother back in 81 when Joan went missing. And they were still married when Joan was found in 1990. According to her, Joan's parents and brother kept telling the same story. Lenny killed Joan. But that's a story that she never really believed. I mean, so much so it's part of what caused a rift with her and her husband. And they've since divorced. And she's like made it her life's mission to get people asking questions about Joan's case again. And she's been doing her own investigation. Even hired a PI to help her pull records and interview witnesses and review trial transcripts. And she sees a lot of the tunnel vision I think that we do. And she validates the way that Marie's family feels. That her case was a lot about Joan. Like, apparently, they even did a search of Candy's place. Again, Candy's related to Marie's case. But the items that investigators hoped to find were ones tied to Joan. So what's Eve's stance on Marie's case? Does she think Lenny did one but not the other? Well, she feels like both investigations left loose ends, albeit a lot more in Joan's. But even in Marie's case, she still has questions, mostly about David, the boyfriend. And I wish I could tell you a lot about the conversations police had with him. I should be able to because they did over 20 interviews with the guy. But when the lead detective took the stand in Lenny's trial, he admitted that he didn't take any reports on any of those 20 interviews. What? But I bet they were illuminating because he was just acting straight up odd after her murder. Like on Monday morning, shortly after Marie's body was identified, family members went to David's house to pick up a dress for the wake. And according to court documents, they found Marie's belongings all packed up and what they believed was blood on the stairs. Now, ADA Burke told us that he doesn't believe that David's home was processed at the start, but he says once he learned about the staircase that he had a lead detective inspect it, and they determined that it was paint, not blood. But Marie's family also testified in front of the grand jury that they noticed scratches on David's hands. And the explanation for the scratches kept changing over time. Like, first, he said it was a cat, and then it was, like, work, and then it was a car accident, then a bar fight. And we not talking like small marks These were like deep gouges and Marie had long fingernails Now as far as we know just like Joan family Marie family believes that Lenny was her killer Still, one family member remembers something else that stuck out with them. On the drive to Marie's wake, David asked if he should start dating again. Timing. And when he got there, Marie's family member claimed that David threw a joint into Marie's coffin, which like just felt out of place to them. Now, David said in his grand jury testimony that he struggled with substance use, though. So that might explain some of this behavior, but it doesn't make it any easier to understand from Marie's family. And then there's what happened just before Marie's funeral. David never showed up to the funeral because he had flown to New Jersey under Marie's stepbrother's name. And he ended up getting arrested in Newark Airport for stealing luggage. What? It's weird, right? Like, yes, but I don't even know what to, like, make of it. Like, what does it even mean? I don't know. It only stands out in my mind because of Joan's case. But if you divorce the two, like, what the hell was he doing? Yeah, like, I'm trying to even come up with something that makes sense if you don't divorce the two. Like, it still doesn't really work for Joan's case. No, it doesn't really make sense. And if he didn't have any connection to Joan, the only thing tying them together was Lenny. Well, so here's the thing. So he didn't know Joan personally. But guess what a local newspaper reported? David worked as a shuttle bus driver at Logan Airport. So he has a connection to the airport. Yeah, a loose connection. But to me, about as loose as the idea that Lenny just like swung by the airport and picked Jonah. Right. Does he look like the sketch? So not to me. That's a good point. So he's in his 20s at the time. Which is younger than like... Yeah, the 40-year-old guy they saw her with. And listen, I know that they looked at David for Joan's case at least a little bit, but investigators say that he was ruled out. They just don't say how he was ruled out. And I need to say, David did have an alibi for Marie's murder. He lived with his mom, who told police that he came home from the reception without Marie around 4.30 p.m. He went out briefly that evening, was back by 9. The issue all these years later is we spoke with wedding guests who remember David returning to the party later that night. And no one ever placed David inside the bar where Marie was last seen. But his house was only a few blocks away. You know, if you were just going to like walk over and be right back in 30 minutes. Totally doable. It could have been who she called from the bar to see if he was home. Would have been nice to know, but those records were never pulled. Of course. Or at least they're not in the files that we have today. But I didn't see anywhere where David admits to getting a call from Marie. He said that he didn't think he was going to see her that night at all because Marie told him that she was going to go, like, stay at her parents. But apparently she told her parents that she was going to stay at David's. But at the end of the day, she's still last seen leaving with Lenny, who was already a bad dude before this. For sure. Her friend last saw her leaving with Lenny. But apparently one of the bar owners told police that he remembered Marie being there like near closing time at around 1.45 in the morning. And then another person we spoke to who was at the bar that night remembered that last call was around 1.25 and Marie was still there. And he doesn't remember seeing Lenny at that time. And if Lenny and Candy were telling the truth, that might make sense. So if she maybe came back after leaving with him, then really all investigators have is jailhouse confessions and the fact that Lenny knew the Marshes. And like jailhouse confessions, by the way, that like don't always add up. Yeah, and by the way, turns out you could say the same thing about David. One man told police and later testified that David confessed to killing Marie at some party in 1981, saying that Marie was seeing someone else and he, quote, did what he had to do. And that same witness also claimed that David tried to kill him twice after he went to police. And it turns out that those marshes where she's found is near a trash dump site, like this local landfill. And David worked in garbage collection at the time. ADA Burke told us that he asked the lead detective to follow up on the allegation that David confessed. And that witness was determined not to be credible. But I have real concerns when I look at the documents in Lenny's case, because after his conviction, there are a series of sworn affidavits submitted alleging that witnesses who testified in front of the grand jury were pressured to change or soften their testimony about David before the trial and even threatened with arrest or losing custody of their children. So like this idea of like, oh, I put both of them in front of the grand jury and the grand jury is who chose Lenny. Was it based on the testimony of coerced people? Yeah. And listen, Lenny's defense lawyer told us that he could imagine pressuring or at least like them changing witnesses minds, like telling them that like, don't you want to do the right thing? Don't you want to get like a bad guy off the streets? Ada Burke told us that the safeguard against witness intimidation at the time was the court. He said that any witness who felt pressured could just like bring it to a judge. Oh, OK. But I ask, could they really? Like, I get it on paper, yes, but in practice, because according to an investigation by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting, in the years surrounding Lenny's prosecution, Massachusetts prosecutors were repeatedly found by the state's appellate and Supreme Court to have violated defendants' rights to a fair trial. Judges overturned at least 120 convictions since the mid-1980s in part or entirely because of prosecutorial misconduct. Things like withholding evidence, failing to disclose information that could undermine witness credibility, or misrepresenting evidence to juries, which makes you call into question even those supposed confessions. Those two informants may have had something to gain. Like when it comes to Robert Bond, in one sworn statement, another inmate says that he personally saw Bond with Lenny's court papers, copying information into a yellow legal pads. And then after that, the inmate says that Bond started talking openly about how police were trying to tie Lenny to the Marie Iannuzzi murder and Joan Webster's disappearance, and that he planned to write the district attorney claiming that Lenny confessed. He says that Bond talked about money, talked about legal help, and getting his own case overturned and even asked this guy to like go along with the story, but the inmate said no. And then there's a whole nother story from a different inmate that's like very similar to that one. The other guy who snitched on Lenny had an even fishier story. Like, and I won't bog you down with all the details, but basically the inmate helped a lawyer with some like legal work and the lawyer that he worked for represented Lenny and court records. And that inmate's sworn affidavit show that after he cooperated with prosecutors, including testifying against Lenny, he was allowed to plead to a lesser charge in his own murder case, and he was released after about 14 years, even though he originally faced a life sentence. None of that context was shared with the jury at Lenny's trial. So does Lenny have a lawyer fighting all of this? He did for many years, But it didn't get anywhere. And in 2008, Lenny died in a prison hospital, maintaining his innocence. You know, he had a daughter and she told us that she knows her dad hurt women. Like that's not like up for discussion. She doesn't excuse that. But what she does push back on is the idea that he committed these murders. And she says that once police zeroed in on her dad, their minds were made up. In the months after Lenny's arrest, she told us that she was followed and questioned by undercover officers. She was approached at Logan Airport and then later at her workplace. And they were pressing her to say that she knew something about her dad. And she said it got so overwhelming that eventually she left the state for more than a year just to, like, get away from it. But it seems to her like it is just her and Eve who believe that Lenny didn't get a fair shake. To them, the rest of the world seems satisfied that the right man was put behind bars. Ada Burke actually published a book expanding on the case that he won at trial. And in it, he claims that Lenny wasn't just responsible for Marie and Jones murders. He suggests that Lenny was a serial killer who committed more murders than he was ever charged with. And listen, in a courtroom, a prosecutor is bound by rules. Like there's the standard of proof. Outside of court, those standards don't really exist the same way, especially when you're talking about a convicted murderer. About 20 years earlier, Lenny tried to sue Burke for libel in connection with an article he published calling him a suspect in Jones' murder. But Lenny lost. Not because the claims were proven true, but because the court ruled that Lenny didn't have any reputation left to protect. Now listen, I don't know if Lenny was innocent, but I do see real problems with his trial and the investigation. especially the investigation into Joan's case, which got no trial. So if not Lenny, then who? I don't have an answer to that. I can tell you where I would start looking if like I had the badge though. First of all, I'm not convinced these cases are connected. So first things first, I would treat them as two distinctly separate cases. In Marie's case, I would want to know a lot more about David. I would want to know if Marie really was seeing someone else. I would want to know who did she call from the bar that night. For Joan's case, I would be looking close to Harvard. Someone she knew. That area where her body was found. Where someone visited to make sure that her remains would stay buried. Like you had to know it. And guess what we found out? The area where Joan was found was actually close to Harvard-owned property. and the woman who found Joan Skull was married to a man who had connections to Cambridge. I'm sorry, that seems super relevant here. Yeah. Now, according to Eve, that guy was cleared. But like, knowing how hard they focused on Lenny, I'm like, you know, let me just like... What does cleared mean? Yeah. Let me just see who this guy is and if he's done anything wild or committed any crimes in the last 50 years. You know, this is like I usually do this in a lot of our cases. I'm like, I just like do background checks on the people involved. Just want to check. Yeah. You'll get surprised. So like I was fully ready to go down a rabbit hole on this one. You usually are. But this is where it got stranger for me. So that man who lived near the property owned by Harvard was a guy named Dr. Jonah Churgin. He was a social sciences professor at a college in Maryland in the 70s, even ran for mayor of the college town at some point before he resigned without really any statement or explanation in 1974. By the time Joan was at Harvard in 1981, he was working there as an administrator. Not in Joan's school and no connection between them as far as we know. But this is what's so weird. There is like nothing on this guy online. I mean, not nothing. Like, I found a book written by him that only existed on eBay. So, like, I bought it. It just came in. I haven't even gotten to read it yet. We'll report back. And there are, like, a couple of old newspaper articles about his early career. Like, a few blips in 1978. Maybe one thing I found in 86. Like, some property sale, if it's the same guy, in Florida. But then this dude just does not exist. And I'm not just talking about on Google. When we searched databases, this guy does not come up, which I hardly ever see. Now, maybe he went off the grid. He and his wife, because by the way, I couldn't find anything for her either. And I think this is extra weird because like there were in the few articles I've seen about him, it talks about how he has like all these academic accolades, these multiple degrees. He was, you know, wrote that book. He was like publishing a paper that people were talking about. And then just like, poof, nothing. And so I had this weird, probably wrong idea. But listen, call me crazy, but it's 2026 in a world where we still aren't getting everything in the Epstein files. And there have been zero arrests. And I trust the government about zero percent. Here are the things I know and the things that I find strange. When you put them all in one place. Yeah. Jones' family had confirmed ties to the CIA. It is pretty well documented that during the Cold War and into the 1970s and 80s, the CIA recruited on college campuses through academic departments, through research programs, and administrative roles. And to me, it's like when you dig into this case, Jones case, you keep just like running up against dead ends, just like missing records, unanswered questions and entire chapters of people's lives that just stop like Jonah's. And that kind of murkiness makes it harder, not easier to ever be certain about what really happened. Now, even though he was in his late 30s when Joan went missing, I don't know that Jonah looked much like our sketch. Based on at least, like, the two pictures I could find of this guy online, which, notably, are from years before. Not from, like, around the time Joan was murdered. And again, to be extra clear, police later told a private investigator that Eve hired that this guy was ruled out as a suspect in Joan's case. But like, Jonah, Jonah's family, if you are out there, like, send me a smoke signal. Like, let me know you're real. Let me know you're alive. I would love to talk to you about who else was on that property, knew that property by where you live. Like, who would come and go? I have all of the questions. So, Joan Webster's murder is still unsolved and open. Marie Iannuzzi's case is considered closed. and the man convicted of her murder has passed away. Is that the truth of what happened to her? Maybe. But I don't know because of how both cases were handled. Joan and Marie both deserve investigations based on evidence, not assumptions. So my question isn't just who killed Joan and Marie. It's why didn't anyone want the truth? But I think someone out there knows what happened. Maybe the man who drove that blue taxi that Joan got into. or maybe it was someone who was at the bar the night Marie was last seen alive. Just because this episode ends doesn't mean we stop. You know that. We never stop. So if anyone out there has any bit of information to share about the cases of Joan Webster or Marie Iannuzzi, email us, tips at audiochuck.com. You can find all the source material for this episode on our website, CrimeJunkie.com. And you can follow us on Instagram at Crime Junkie Podcast. We'll be back next week with a brand new episode. Crime Junkie is an AudioChuck production. I think Chuck would approve. Some cases fade from headlines. Some never made it there to begin with. I'm Ashley Flowers, and on my podcast, The Deck, I tell you the stories of cold cases featured on playing cards distributed in prisons designed to spark new leads and bring long overdue justice. Because these stories deserve to be heard, and the loved ones of these victims still deserve answers. Are you ready to be dealt in? Listen to The Deck now, wherever you get your podcasts.