Sarah Widmer

Criminology is a true crime podcast that may contain discussion about violent or disturbing topics. Your discussion is advised. Hello everyone and welcome to episode 405 of the Criminology podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson. And this is Mike Morford. Mr. Morford, how you doing this week, buddy? I'm doing pretty good. How you doing? I'm doing great. My oldest daughter has been off for spring break. She's a real adult now. I mean, she's got a full-time job. She's a speech pathologist at a school. She's just happy to get a spring break. Well, that's pretty cool to have a job where you do get to have some breaks now and then. I know you're a voice of teacher, so you get that little bit of time off and recharge the batteries. Yeah, they're excited for the summer because they're going to be able to hang out together now. So, very cool. Neither you nor I ever experienced that because we didn't get our summers off, but teachers deserve it. They put up with a lot. Yeah, they give them a lot of credit and deserve a little break. Yeah, absolutely. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shout-outs. We had Shannon Swinson and Scott Dizlores. So great new support. We really appreciate it. Yeah, thank you so much, Shannon and Scott, and to everyone else that helped support the show. Anyone that wants to sign up, head over to patreon.com. And just a quick reminder, it's kind of hard to believe, but CrimeCon is only about six weeks away. It's happening May 29th through the 31st at Caesars Palace, Las Vegas. If you've put it off and you want to go, go out and book now because we want to see you there. We'll be on Creator's Row. If you still need passes, use our promo code CRIMENOLOGY to save 10% on your standard badges when you check out at CrimeCon.com. And we're also excited to let everyone know that our annual Joint Criminology TCAT Meetup will be happening on Saturday night, May 30th at 8 p.m. in the Vista Cocktail Lounge. It's right on premises at Caesars, so there's no need to worry about getting a ride or walking or any of that stuff. And, you know, our Meetups are always a lot of fun. We get to meet people, hang out, have a few Coca-Cola's. You know, I always look forward to it. So now that we have all that out of the way, it's time to get into this week's case. And we have a pretty wild one with a lot of twists. We're talking about the death of a woman named Sarah Widmer in August 2009 in my home state of Ohio. Her husband was found guilty of murdering her not once, but multiple times. But he is always steadfastly denied, having anything to do with her death, and he has more than his fair share of supporters who think that he was not involved. So the question is, what really happened to Sarah Widmer? Just before 11 p.m. on the night of August 11, 2009, Ryan Widmer dialed 911, requesting help at his home in Hamilton Township, Ohio. According to Ryan, his wife, 24-year-old Sarah Widmer, had fallen asleep while she was taking a bath and accidentally drowned. He could tell that she was already dead, but he didn't want it to be true. When officers arrived, Sarah was lying on the floor of the bedroom she and Ryan shared. She was naked, and her hair was wet, but her body was dry. Her body was still warm when checking for a pulse, but she had none. Ryan was also in the bedroom, wearing his boxers. There were no visible injuries to either of their bodies. Sarah was rushed to the hospital. Five different attempts to intubate her, some in the bedroom and others in the ambulance while en route to the hospital, were all unsuccessful. Finally, in the emergency room, a doctor was able to properly intubate her, but by then it was of no use. After nearly 30 minutes in the hospital, she was officially pronounced dead. I think it's more of a question, obviously, we have to talk about people dying a lot in the episodes that we do. Most of the time, we're talking about murder because, let's face it, that's what makes up a large part of true crime cases. I just always try to put myself in people's positions. Ryan's position in this case, and it's hard to because I can't imagine what it would be like to find your significant other dead. Now, obviously, there's a lot more to this story that we're going to get into, but I think about that scenario and wow, it just is really hard for me to fathom. It seems like a really chaotic scene too, everything unfolding quickly, and she's rushed to the hospital, he tried multiple times to save her, it was of no use. It seems this would be a shocking death for Sarah's family. She wasn't sick, she wasn't battling something. This happened suddenly, and Ryan called on family to come help him during this time. Ryan asked his mother, Jill, to go to their home and get some of his clothes. He told her that he couldn't stand a stepped foot inside the home that Sarah died in. Just two years earlier, Ryan Widmer and Sarah Stewart were set up on a blind date by mutual friends. One of Sarah's friends had married Ryan's college roommate. In August of 2006, they met in a bar and then began dating. Friends would later describe in a courtroom that Sarah had finally met the man of her dreams. They two married in April of 2008 and had a beautiful honeymoon in Costa Rica. They were planning their future together, trips to Cancun, adopting a pet, maybe starting a family, suddenly there was no future for the two of them. Ryan told investigators that on the night of the 11th when Sarah died, after they both got home from work, they had dinner, which was left over hamburgers, cheesy mashed potatoes, and corn on the cob. And they sat down and watched some TV together. After a while, Ryan switched it to the football game. It was the Bengals versus the Packers. And Sarah decided to go upstairs and take a bath. It was a lazy relaxing night up to that point. Sarah reminded Ryan to make sure everything downstairs was put away and the house was locked up before he came up to get into the bed later. They exchanged I love yous and then Sarah went upstairs. When Ryan decided to head upstairs and get ready to go to sleep, he was surprised that Sarah was still in the bath. So he decided to check on her. That's when he found her floating in the water. So I think a lot of people may look at that part of the story more often and say, well, there's really not anything all that suspicious or unusual about Ryan's story. And I can relate it to my own life. My wife goes to bed way earlier than I do. So we exchange our I love yous, good nights. She goes up to bed. I usually go down in the basement where I stay up later and work and play games and whatever. But you know, I assume she's sleeping. Yeah. My wife and I are the same. We have the same kind of routine. I work sometimes at night. She's watching TV and then going to bed. And you know, sometimes I don't really see her until I get in the bed or in the morning when we first wake up and talk. However, investigators became suspicious of Ryan after hearing his story. First of all, he created his alibi from the beginning. He called 911 and told the dispatcher, my wife, she fell asleep in the bathtub. I think I was downstairs. Ryan also told nurses in the emergency room that he found Sarah face up in the bathtub. But he had told the 911 dispatcher and later told investigators that he found her lying face down. He also told investigators that this was the first time Sarah had ever fallen asleep in the bathtub. But when he was talking to the 911 dispatcher, he said that she fell asleep while she was taking a bath quite often. So obviously there are various stories or various versions of the story. So you could see why, you know, a changing story might arouse police suspicions. Yet I can see Ryan being upset. This probably happened a million miles an hour in his head and he could be confused. And maybe that could explain some of the differences in the story. But of course, him covering it up or having a partner could also account for his changing stories because he just made mistakes in the retelling of it. And it wasn't something honest and truthful. But one thing that stood out to me, I could see if someone fell asleep in a bathtub, they would most likely be in a sitting position. So their back would be to the water. But if she indeed was faced down in the water, that to me seems a little bit unusual for somebody that was simply taking a bath and fell asleep. Yeah, I get you there. I definitely could see why police would be a little suspicious of Ryan. I mean, first of all, he has to be ruled out. Right? He's the husband. We know that. And then the changing of the stories, it never looks good. Now, there might be valid reasons for it. The entire scene in the bathroom didn't seem as wet as investigators would have expected for an accident like this. The bedroom floor wasn't wet and the bathtub was nearly dry. Most importantly, the bathroom floor was dry. There should have been a puddle of water from Ryan desperately pulling Sarah out of the tub and onto the floor, but there was nothing. Investigators also noted that her hands and feet showed no signs that she had been in the water for a prolonged period of time. We've all seen our fingers get wrinkled or pruny after a long hot bath. But Sarah's fingers hadn't done this. There was one used Lysol wipe found at the scene. Lieutenant Brailey, one of the investigators, believed that it could have been used to erase evidence of what really happened in that bathroom. Ryan said he didn't pull Sarah out of the tub until the dispatcher told him to. And that's kind of shocking to hear. Even in a panic or not knowing what to do, you would think that pulling your wife out of the water she was drowning in would be your first instinct. Maybe you don't know how to do CPR and would need the dispatcher to guide you through that, but most people know that when someone's drowning, the very first thing that needs to happen in order for them to get help is to stop them from drowning. Their face needs to be pulled above water. For whatever reason, Ryan waited until he was instructed to get her out of the tub. Still, despite pulling her out of the water while he was on the phone with 911, everything had dried by the time any first responders arrived. And it wasn't just that bathroom that held clues for investigators. The TVs in the home were also a clue. The TV downstairs was not turned to the channel showing the Bingles game that night. But the TV in their bedroom was. Ryan claimed he had been downstairs watching football while Sarah had a fatal accident. But it appeared that he had been watching TV in their bed. Just feet from the tub. However, Ryan claimed that this discrepancy was because he had switched away from the football game to be able to check on what was going on with the Olympics. Police were intrigued by what they found and what they didn't find. And they hoped an autopsy would provide more answers. Warren County Coroner Dr. Russell up to grow found multiple injuries on Sarah's body that weren't obvious to the first officers who arrived at the scene. There were multiple bruises on her face and on her neck. One of them the size of a fingertip and contusions on her scalp. Investigators believe that Ryan drowned Sarah holding her head under water until she died. They just weren't sure where or how it happened. Investigators actually seized the bathtub and removed it from the home. There were apparent marks of interest left on its surface. Despite Sarah's fingernails being clean and undamaged, investigators think some of the marks, which left marks on the surface of the tub, look like they were made by human fingernails. So tubs are very hard, whatever they're made of, whether they're acrylic, hard plastic, cast iron, whatever it is, and we don't know what the tub in this home was made from. But you would think if Sarah's nails dragged hard enough along the tub to somehow leave marks in the surface, then her fingernails would likely show damage too. But that wasn't the case. Despite the fact that investigators couldn't prove what made the marks or when they were made, that was used as evidence. The neatness of the bathroom, shampoo bottles still on the side of the tub, no water splashed everywhere, works with both arguments in this case. If Ryan had frantically tried to pull her out of the bathtub to save her life, how did he not bump into anything? But at the same time, if Ryan held her head under the water until she died, how did nothing get knocked over during the struggle? How was she not thrashing and getting water everywhere? Investigators believe that items were placed back neatly after her death before he called 911. A delay in calling for help after the event would even help explain why things were so dry. According to the Cincinnati Inquirer, Dr. Uptegro believed that Sarah's head was pushed over the edge of the tub or toilet or sink or forwards or backwards, either in running or full water. A struggle at the sink or toilet could explain why everything around the edge of the tub was still neatly in their designated spots. It would also explain why only the area near the bathtub drain seemed wet. Ryan could have run water and then claimed it all drained. And it would explain how only Sarah's hair got wet. Of course, if it didn't happen in the tub, then those supposed marks from fingernails or forearm don't matter anymore and probably aren't evidence. Detectives didn't waste any time. In 27 year old, Ryan Widmer was arrested and charged with aggravated murder on August 13th, just two days after Sarah died. Though they hadn't been married long enough to discuss preferences for their eventual burials, Ryan decided to have Sarah's body cremated. Ryan was unable to attend Sarah's funeral because he was in jail waiting for trial. His bond was initially set at $1 million, something he would never be able to afford, especially in time to make it to the service. It was finally reduced to 400,000, which still meant a non refundable payment of $40,000. If he wanted to be free before his trial, his father was able to pay the bond, but Ryan was released two hours after his wife's service. The same priest who was at their wedding is the one who performed the service at her funeral. It was a full circle moment. Ryan found himself in a tough situation. If he had something to do with his wife's death, his plan to cover it up hadn't worked and he was going to be tried. But if he had nothing to do with Sarah's death, then he was in a nightmare of a situation facing losing his freedom for something he didn't do. Ryan Whitmer's trial finally began in March 2009. It had been nearly a year since Sarah's death. The trial moved swiftly and Ryan Whitmer was found not guilty of aggravated murder, but he was found guilty of murder. Aggravated murder is more serious charge and requires evidence of premeditation. However, this conviction wouldn't last long. It turned out that some of the jurors had disregarded the instructions given to them. One of the jurors contacted the defense team and informed them that multiple jurors had gone home during the trial and tried to figure out how long it took a body to dry. Based on those jurors at home experiments, they felt Ryan was lying because Sarah's body would not have completely dried off that quickly, thus leading to their decision to find him guilty. The problem is jurors aren't supposed to do any deliberating about the case when they're not all together and they're not supposed to consider anything that wasn't presented as evidence or testified to a trial. Getting wet and seeing how long it takes you to dry or getting your carpet wet and seeing how long it stays damp are not things that came out at trial. Even if it proved that something was possible or impossible, you just can't take it into consideration. It's just one of the many reasons that being a juror can be frustrating, but jury service is something we have to take very seriously. And for me, more if this is a fascinating part of this case, and really you can extrapolate it out to many cases. Right? Jurors are given very specific instructions, but we're all human. Right? So if you were a juror on a murder case, I would think there would be a lot of temptation to try to, you know, analyze some of the things while you weren't in the deliberation room, right? Before you got to that point. So even though they probably knew they weren't supposed to, I could understand someone trying to do kind of their own experiments at home. I'm not saying it's right. I just, I can understand why or how someone would want to do that. And I'm sure it's been done in many cases that probably don't get publicized, right? Or it never comes to light because they don't tell anybody they did it. Yeah. And it makes me wonder, have people been convicted or not convicted based on similar type of things that somehow slipped through and one of the jurors didn't come to someone on one, the defense team or the prosecution or the judge whoever and say something about it. So it's definitely something you don't think about. No, I didn't really think about it much before, you know, getting into this case. Now, the one thing I will say is how likely is it that, you know, that type of experiment would change that person's thoughts on the case? I get it. It's wrong. You're not supposed to do it. But in the end, is it really going to change in most cases? Someone's opinion on the case. I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. Folks, raise your hand if you're ready to lose nine pounds before summer with our next sponsor, Veracity. This podcast is sponsored by Veracity. Welcome to an all natural way to slim down. Get energized and sharpen your focus. Veracity is revolutionizing health by tackling the root cause of so many issues. Metabolism with Veracity's drug free, clinically proven and doctor formulated solutions. You can support your body's needs to live your healthiest life. And if your goal is weight loss, you need to try metabolism ignite. The number one doctor recommended GLP one booster and GLP one alternative. Metabolism ignite is a natural safe plant based aid that results in an 85% reduction in hunger and is clinically proven to lose on average nine pounds in 90 days. Just two capsules with breakfast of metabolism ignite makes me feel energized and focused all day. And I love it when something is scientifically legit, but doesn't come with a warning label that makes me panic. So before metabolism ignite sells out again, make the switch to GLP ones the natural way. Head to veracity health.co and use code criminology for up to 65% off your order. Once again, that's V.E.R. ACITY health.co for up to 65% off and make sure you use our promo code criminology so they know we sent you. You know, spring makes me rethink what's in my closet. I'm trying to keep fewer things, but better ones, pieces that are well made and easy to wear all the time. And that's why I keep coming back to quints. The fabrics feel elevated, the fits are thoughtful, and the pricing actually makes sense. Quints makes high quality, everyday essentials using premium materials like 100% European linen and their insanely soft flow net active wear fabric. And that flow net active wear is my favorite. I love their shorts, their joggers, their tops. I wear it all. It's moisture wicking, anti odor and soft enough that you'll actually want to wear it all day. The best part is that Quints' prices are 50 to 60% less than similar brands. Well, how do they do that? Quints works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middleman. So you're paying for quality, not brand markup. Everything is designed to last and make getting dressed easy. Refresh your wardrobe with Quints. Go to quints.com slash criminology for free shipping and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. Go to qince.com slash criminology for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quints.com slash criminology. In July of 2009, Ryan Widmer's conviction was overturned and he was granted a new trial due to juror misconduct. This time he could only be charged with murder, not aggravated murder. The acquittal on one charge of aggravated murder was still legally valid. Only his murder conviction had been overturned. It took nearly a year for the proceedings to actually begin. While he awaited his second trial, he was granted bail. He went on living his life and even tried building a new one. Ryan's story drew many supporters over the years. There was a website, free ryanwidmer.com, as well as a Facebook group full of people who believed in his innocence. Bumper stickers reading Free Ryan Widmer were slapped on cars. While Ryan fought to clear his name, he met a woman whose name was also Sarah and began an intimate relationship with her. She actually became pregnant and the two would go on to have a son to get. So more of a, I guess, got to take a minute here and talk about this. We talked about the juror misconduct and that ultimately overturning his conviction, but the acquittal on the charge of aggravated murder. It was said was still legally valid. And I found that to be very fascinating. So basically they're saying that part is still OK. The acquittal on that charge, but the conviction on the charge of murder was overturned. You would think, and I'm not a legal expert, obviously, by any means, but you would kind of think the whole thing would just have to be redone. But that's not the way it played out. Yeah, I'm with you. And maybe we have some legal eagles that are listeners that can chime in and social media, let us know. But it seems to me that if the jury in any part of the trial is tainted, you have to redo the whole thing. That's what I would think. And just from the start and see what the outcome is not say, OK, we're going to go with what they came to a conclusion of despite that that improper stuff just doesn't make sense to me. Yeah, now I could understand the prosecution and a retrial, maybe not even trying to go after aggravated murder because, you know, the first jury didn't find enough premeditation there to warrant it. But to not even have the choice or not legally be able to do it, that whole thing seemed kind of strange to me. In 2009, an episode of Dateline NBC about Sarah's death was aired and a woman named Jennifer Crew watched it from her home in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Afterward, she decided to contact Ryan. The two emailed an instant message to each other before beginning to regularly speak on the phone. Jennifer claimed that on October 26, after about a month of communicating with each other, Ryan made a shocking confession to her. According to the Springfield News, son, Jennifer claimed that Ryan called her upset, sobbing and nearly impossible to understand, saying, I did it. I did it. I killed Sarah. At first, Jennifer thought he was just feeling guilty for not noticing that his wife was asleep in the tub and a drown and for not checking on her sooner, that kind of thing. She tried to console and reassure him, but he interrupted her, saying, no, Jen, listen to me, I did it. He then admitted what really happened that night. According to Jennifer, Ryan Widmer said Sarah hadn't fallen asleep in the bathtub. She had confronted Ryan, accusing him of smoking and drinking too much and of watching pornography. She even threatened to leave him, which made him furious. He followed her into the bathroom where she was preparing her bath. He told her, no one leaves me and he hit her in the chest. It made her fall and hit her head. Ryan said he must have blacked out when this happened because the next thing he knew, Sarah was unconscious and unresponsive on the floor. Her hair was wet and he immediately began to clean up the scene, drying the floor with towels. He had the evidence of a cleanup before he finally called 911. This revelation shocked Jennifer Kru. She had truly believed that Ryan was innocent. It's the whole reason she ever reached out to him after seeing the Dateline episode. She didn't tell anyone about what Ryan said because he had allegedly warned her. I wouldn't want you to end up where Sarah is. Obviously, in light of that confession, she would have no reason to doubt that he was capable of falling through with any threats. She eventually changed her mind about keeping his secrets. When she saw how broken Sarah's mom, Ruth, and steward was during the second trial. Jennifer Kru certainly knew a lot about Ryan and his relationship with Sarah. Even things that hadn't been revealed that either of the first two trials. She knew that Ryan and Sarah's couple song was Motley Kru's You're All I Need and that Sarah's childhood nickname was Stewie. However, none of the information she gave about the confession actually lined up with the evidence. Remember, there was no evidence of any bruising on her chest. A blow there from Ryan so hard that it knocked her off balance would have likely caused some kind of mark. There were also no wet towels anywhere. Investigators thought the lack of water in the bathroom was odd, so they definitely looked for them. In the timeline she gave for the phone calls Ryan allegedly had with her, didn't add up with actual phone records. So a couple of questions come to mind. First and I think most obvious, if you're Ryan and you had indeed killed your wife and you were trying to cover it up, why come out and confess to someone that you don't even know all that well? That leads to another question. Can we believe everything Jennifer Kru said? And if she's not being truthful, why isn't she being truthful? And more of these kind of revelations are always tough for me. Just because, you know, whether it's a jailhouse informant, I don't really want to compare Jennifer Kru to a jailhouse informant, but it's that scenario where one person who is on trial for their life confides in one person, these unbelievably damning secrets. Right? And then it's impossible not to start asking these questions. Why would they do that? And this guy has to know that he's fighting for his life. He's fighting for his freedom. So whether he actually did it or not, what's the impetus for kind of laying his soul bear to this woman who he barely knows? Now, one could make an argument that, you know, his conscience just got to him and he had to unload all this stuff onto somebody. And that's possible. If this alleged confession was made to someone that you're sharing a prison cell with and that's something that most of us can't imagine and maybe there's some kind of bond there or it was being shared with a close family member who he trusted or a longtime friend, I could maybe say, OK, that seems possible. But to me, it just seems unlikely that he would risk outing himself to someone, as you said, he barely knew and had only known a short time. I just I have a hard time buying it. Well, I think here's the other problem with it is how do you verify? Right there. Maybe there are some things that Jennifer is saying that weren't public knowledge. You could also make the argument that, you know, how hard would it be to find out what their their song was at their wedding? How hard would it really be to find out what her childhood nickname was? But then for me, the other big thing is if this is all made up, I mean, what's the what would be the reason for someone like Jennifer to to do that? I mean, we do know some people just like to insert themselves into the investigation or, you know, maybe there's an idea that there's going to be a 15, you know, minutes of fame from this or whatever. But I don't know. The whole thing just seems odd to me. And an interesting side note is that Motley Crew song, you're all I need is one of my favorite Motley Crew songs. But it's very dark and it's about a couple in love that broke up and the male killed the female. So it's it's a very dark song. And if it's not true, it seems like it was something she put out there that would make him look even more guilty because of the lyrics in that song. But if it is their real song that they that they liked as a couple, then, you know, that's a pretty ironic song in itself. But it does seem kind of a strange song, maybe for the wedding song or and maybe it wasn't the song played at the wedding. It was just their favorite song. Yeah, I don't know. In Ryan's second trial, the second jury couldn't come to an anonymous verdict. And a third trial was on the horizon before going through the trouble of a third trial. The prosecution offered Ryan a plea deal and he turned it down. Ryan still hoped that the third jury would see the truth, especially known that more than one juror wasn't able to find him guilty. But on February 15th, 2011, after a third trial, he was found guilty of murder. He was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. At the time, his son was very young. His second wife, Sarah, who had uprooted her entire life to move to Hamilton township and be with Ryan was stunned. One of the jurors from the third trial revealed that Ryan's demeanor and behavior in court was a very important factor in their decision. He seemed to have zero reaction when the autopsy photos were shown. And it didn't sit right with at least one of the jurors. One juror told the Cincinnati inquirer he didn't react like a normal person. His wife is dead, should have. Three times, Ryan sat there in a courtroom and didn't tell his side of the story. Now, that may very well have been due to the advice of his counsel. Ryan would tell WLWT five news. There's nothing I can say to change anything in his mind. He has told his story to the police. He was downstairs when his wife accidentally fell asleep in the bathtub or suffered some kind of medical emergency while bathing and drowned. He just found her when it was too late to say for. So there's two things here I want to touch on. And, you know, one is something we talk about quite a lot. And that's a person's behavior, whether it's while they're being interviewed, while they have a loved one missing. In this case, you know, it's their behavior in court. And you have at least one juror saying that was a big deal to them. He didn't react like a normal person. Now, I think you could make an argument both ways. Right. You could make one that says, how could you not react in some way when autopsy photos of your late wife are shown in court? You can also make the argument that, you know, this is his third trial. He's been going through this. He also has a new wife and a child. So I don't know. I think it's tough to say how a person should act. I think that's always tough. But then you have the part where he doesn't testify in any of the three trials. And to me, that's not that unusual. Right. Most defendants don't testify because their attorneys don't want them to. There's just too much downside in it. But what I will say is I do think there are people, sometimes jurors who view that negatively like this person is not willing to take the stand and tell us he didn't do it or get up there and tell his story, even though they really shouldn't, right? Because the defendant has that right not to. And that's, you know, the frightening part. If you are a defendant who is truly innocent, the fact that you chose not to testify could be something the jury sees as fishy. And just the optics of how you react or don't react could also sway the jury one way or the other, you know, if he had cried and been emotional, could the jury have said, oh, he looks like he's faking it? So, you know, it just it seems like there's a lot of stock put into optics when, I guess in reality, it should be all about the evidence presented testimony, the stuff that is factual and not how somebody's opinion is based on somebody's looks or behavior. All along, Ryan Widmer has maintained his innocence. He says he has no idea what happened in the bathroom that night, other than the fact that it was a tragic accident. The defense, all three defense teams, believe that Sarah may have had a previously undiagnosed genetic disorder that caused her to become unresponsive when she was in the bathtub. Ryan and his family argue that there is a good chance that she had something called Long QT syndrome, which is a heart rhythm disorder that causes fast, chaotic heartbeats. It's common for people with this disorder to be unaware that they have it for much of their life. According to the Mayo Clinic page on the topic, Long QT syndrome usually causes noticeable symptoms by age 40, and many of the symptoms can happen when someone is asleep. Sarah Widmer was only 24 years old when she died. There was no known reason she should have been unable to get herself out of the water or to wake up once she slipped under. An undiagnosed health condition could explain the inexplicable. And Sarah was born with some health challenges. She had a heart murmur and a cleft palate, the kind of heart murmur she was born with commonly resolved with age. And as far as anyone could tell from any of her checkups, Sarah's had resolved as she grew up. Ryan wasn't the only one to recall that Sarah didn't always feel the best. According to WCPO.com news, Ryan Widmer's twin brother, Aaron, described that Sarah had constant headaches and sleepiness she seemed to have all the time, though neither of those seem to be common symptoms of Long QT syndrome. Sarah's friends described there as someone who could and often did fall asleep anywhere. According to WLWT 5 News, they even gave her the nickname Sleeper because of it. Her boss, Dr. Benjamin Messmer, recalled that on the day she died, Sarah had a headache and some stomach issues. Ruth Ann, Sarah's mother, recalled that Sarah had headaches sometimes, but felt that they were sinus headaches, not a sign of a fatal health condition. But a cardiac test given to Sarah when she was just 10 months old showed no signs of Long QT syndrome, and Sarah had a physical with her doctor just two months before she died, nothing abnormal was found. Ryan's defense team had argued that if it wasn't some kind of cardiac event, then it could have been a seizure that caused her to lose consciousness before her head slipped under the water. Ryan Widmer came to believe that some underlying health defects could be the answer in his wife's death and might also help clear his name. He demanded a fourth trial. He also wanted Sarah's DNA to be analyzed for possible genetic diseases. Because her body had been cremated, there could be no more autopsies or examinations. All that was left other than photos and records was her DNA. A judge denied the request for analysis. His request for a fourth trial was also denied on the grounds that it would be objectively frivolous. In 2018, Ryan's written statement was rediscovered. It's detailed, but his story, other than whether Sarah was facing up or down when he found her, remained unchanged all those years. He mentioned that Sarah had walked up the stairs on her tippy toes and said she often walked like that, thought to have just been a personality quirk of hers. The defense believes that this manner of walking could have been caused by a medical issue, which could have contributed to her death. Sometimes tippy toe walking may be a sign of someone with neurological disorders like muscular dystrophy or spinal cord abnormality. But some people walk that way with no known medical cause. With his appeals, Ryan Whitmer tried to attack Lieutenant Detective Jeff Braley's credibility. He accused Braley of lying on a job application over a decade prior to his getting the case. It makes sense, since Braley was the one who suspected a homicide from the beginning. According to Ryan's appeal papers, it was Braley who told the corner, Dr. Uptegrove, before the autopsy, that something didn't sit right about the crime scene. At one point, there was concern that the 911 dispatcher who took the call that night had been literally sleeping on the job. According to the date and daily news and a report written by Nancy Michuski, dispatcher centers operations service manager Ron Cronenberger sounded as if he came out of a sound sleep and tried to handle a very serious nature to incident. And it seemed as though he was having a hard time comprehending what the caller was saying. And he kept repeating himself. Ryan's attorney, Jay Clark, said that information such as this brings to light just one of the many errors committed by the first responders. Cronenberger was suspicious of Ryan's behavior, accusing him of giving a performance on the 911 call. He believed that Ryan never attempted to give proper CPR to Sarah and made sounds by breathing into the phone while he pretended he was giving her mouth to mouth. So it makes sense to try to get rid of him as a witness, too. It was ultimately ruled that Cronenberger did not mishandle the calls. There were three dispatchers working the night that Ryan called 911. And Cronenberger was the first one to answer. According to county administrator David Gully, Ryan's call was answered within three seconds. He also followed the guidelines in place at the time. Cronenberger had answered a call three minutes before Ryan called. There was no time for him to have been sleeping on the clock. Ryan also argued that his attorney had been ineffective because genetic testing of Sarah's DNA should have been ordered in the first place. He shouldn't have had to fight for it through appeals and motions. In May 2025, Ryan Whitmer's conviction was upheld by a federal appeals court. Two months later, his first opportunity for parole was denied. Ryan's attorney, Michelle Berry, told WLWT 5 News, Justice isn't being served. If anyone should ever be paroled, it's Ryan Whitmer. She went on to make the point that if someone is truly innocent sitting behind bars, they have zero chance of making out of prison without lying and taking accountability for something they didn't do. The board takes the position that everyone is guilty if they're in the prison. If an inmate says he's innocent, it backfires. They want you to say, I'm sorry, I did it. But because Ryan is innocent, he's a sitting duck to get bounced by the parole board. This is a sad day. And more if I do think there is some truth to that statement, you know, a parole board or most parole boards, they do want to see remorse. And a person can't really show remorse if they're not admitting to what they have been convicted of. And so, you know, if you're truly innocent, that can be a real problem because there are innocent people who refuse to say that they did what they were convicted of and it hurts them, right? In the eyes of the parole board. And if you're truly innocent, do you at some point just say, yeah, I'm sorry, I did it knowing it was not true just to get out of prison? I mean, that's a tough situation or do you just based on your principle and knowing the truth, do you just deny it and say, no, I'm not going to say, I'm sorry for something I didn't do. We talked about Ryan Widmer having a lot of people who believed him and he even had support from jurors, one juror, Janet Kaywood, who served as a juror in the second trial, doesn't believe Ryan Widmer should be behind bars. She told local 12.com news. I do feel that Ryan was unjustly convicted for a lot of reasons, mainly the inconclusive evidence and reasonable doubt. Travis Vue who prosecuted all three trials disagree. He told WLWT five. Mr. Widmer's had every opportunity to appeal every aspect of his conviction and his convictions have been upheld at every level. Thirty four of 36 jurors agreed with us that he committed the crime. Vue also explained that Ryan wasn't really trying to better himself behind bars. He really hasn't engaged in anything that would be rehabilitation that we would look for in parole. Those people that believe Ryan Widmer is innocent believe it fully. In fact, it doesn't seem like there's much that would ever convince Ryan's family or supporters that he did kill Sarah. His brother Aaron even told local 12.com news that if they were able to test Sarah's DNA and nothing was found or even disprove their theories, he would still believe Ryan was innocent. He said, if it came back negative, it still wouldn't change my mind about anything. And I don't know more if that shocks me all that much. I mean, there are a lot of times, I think in these cases where family is just never going to believe that their loved one, you know, committed this heinous crime. They just can't bring themselves to do it. And while Ryan has people in his corner, not everyone is convinced of his innocence. And testimony from Sarah's mother, Ruth Ann Stewart, didn't paint a rosy picture of the couple's relationship, even when they were just dating. Ruth Ann testified that the couple was quote on edge before their wedding and nearly constantly arguing over very minor issues. She also described controlling techniques on Ryan's part, remembering that one time when she and Sarah were out shopping, almost as soon as she had completed her transaction, Ryan called to ask what she was buying. Ruth Ann said he asked her why she bought it and did she really need it? Ruth Ann Stewart described her relationship with her daughter as very close. But also made it clear that Sarah was more of a nurturer who always tried to take care of her mother, especially after her father died of cancer, leaving her mom a widow. Ruth Ann believed that the relationship between Sarah and Ryan may have been worse than she knew because Sarah kept any relationship problems to herself so that she wouldn't stress out her mom about them. The same goes for any health issues after having her father so sick for so long. She knew that any mention of a symptom could cause serious anxiety in her mom. So one thing that most people ask is, what's the motive here? Why on this night would Ryan choose to murder his wife? Now, the prosecution does not have to present a motive for murder, but it does help people put the pieces together, especially in cases where there is a lot of circumstantial evidence. One of the jurors who served at the first trial revealed that a lack of motive was the reason they found Ryan not guilty of aggravated murder. Unlike so many recent cases of spouses charged with murder, there was no life insurance policy for Ryan to receive. Sarah's murder wasn't a way for him to get rich quick. It's possible that he thought there was, since she had filled out an application for a policy through her job just two weeks before she died. And maybe there would have been financial issues for Ryan if the two split up. The couple's finances also appeared to be stable. Sarah was a dental hygienist. She worked just over the Kentucky border in Fort Thomas, less than an hour from their home. Ryan worked as a sports planner for the county. Sarah's job apparently paid a bit more, about $10,000 more annually than Ryan's. All in all, it seemed like there was no clear financial gain to be had by Sarah dying. And those that knew the couple, friends and neighbors, mostly had good things to say about them and it appeared that they had a solid relationship. And for me, you know, motive is one of those kind of really big things in any case. It's often what helps lead police to their suspects, right? Who has a motive? What is the motive? And I think for most jurors, they kind of want that in a murder trial. Okay. You're telling us that this guy did it. She have your evidence. It's mostly circumstantial. Tell us why. What's the reason that he would want to do this, but they don't have to. And they don't always know what it is. And sometimes there's not a motive. Sometimes people snap. An argument happens. Something maybe in the heat of the moment happens and a person snaps and does something that they never would have dreamed or do or hadn't planned to do. And they do it in at that moment. So there doesn't always have to be a motive. And we did hear talk about, you know, Sarah possibly confronting Ryan about his drinking, his smoking and the watching of pornography. You know, like you said, there could have been a heated argument and it could have got out of control very quickly. That does happen. You know, not every case is this elaborate plan, right? To get life insurance or to get out of paying alimony because you want to be with someone else. There are a lot of those, but not every case of spousal murder has that element. According to the prosecutor, even though he didn't need to provide a motive in court, there was a real motive for Sarah's murder. Even though it didn't make it into evidence at any of the three trials, despite being newlyweds married for just four months, they weren't in that honeymoon period anymore, or at least Ryan didn't seem to be. He often visited the website adult friend finder, which according to their website is an internet based adult oriented social networking service, online dating service and Swinger personal's community website. Ryan was on that website a number of times, including the weekend before Sarah died. Regarding Ryan's visit to the site, Warren County prosecutor Rachel Hutzel said, that's contrary to claims of the defense, that this was a happily married couple. There's some interesting reading on the legal side of this case. University of Cincinnati law professor and innocence project attorney Donald Castor explained to WCPO.com that just being innocent of a crime on its own isn't a reason for habeas relief and clarified that you have to prove there was a constitutional error in trial. So even if there is evidence that you are innocent, there is no hope for a new trial if everything was done by the book during the trial. You have to hope someone steps in with a pardon or an exoneration. Ryan's parents who were divorced spent nearly half a million dollars on his defense and in trying to clear their son's name. And let's break down that statement, right? Being innocent of a crime on its own isn't a reason for habeas relief. And he went on to say, even if there's evidence you're innocent, that doesn't mean you're going to get a new trial if everything was done by the book during the trial. So I mean, that can be shocking to people because you kind of think just common sense wise that if something comes to light that proves a person's innocence. Well, obviously they're going to be granted a retrial, right? And he's saying, no, that may not be the case. Yeah, that's pretty frightening because if you're in prison for a crime, you didn't commit somebody else committed it, say, and that person comes forward and has a guilty conscience and finally admits to it and lays out exactly what happened. And even at that point, it sounds like unless you are pardoned by somebody high up that you're going to be stuck in prison. And that's pretty scary. And that's why in most appeals, they go after something that they say didn't occur correctly in the case, right? Whether it's ineffective assistance of counsel or jury misconduct, bad jury instructions from a judge, you know, there's always something like that. Jill Whitmer passed away in 2013. Her son, Erin, found her after being unable to get in touch with her for days. Ryan's attorney, Michelle Berry, had no doubt that Jill's death was due to the stress of Ryan being in prison. She told WCP 09, Jill's decline in health was triggered by the tragedy in Ryan's case. The emotional toll of seeing her son wrongfully incarcerated, ate her alive. Ryan wanted to attend her funeral, but was unable to. Now, 44 years old, he will have his next chance to plead his case for a parole. In July of 2030, Ryan Whitmer maintains his innocence. So I think as we wrap this one up more, you know, there's really only two possibilities here. I think the first is that Ryan Whitmer is guilty and he is right where he belongs. And the second is that, you know, he was wrongfully convicted. And if he truly had nothing to do with his wife's death, then obviously that would be a terrible injustice. But either way, a young woman died and her husband has lost his freedom. And to me, these are very interesting cases because, you know, the evidence is mostly circumstantial. You don't have that kind of one piece of smoking gun evidence that kind of proves to the jury conclusively that this person is guilty. Right. It's a, it's a building the mountain of evidence that hopefully shows the jury what happens. But sometimes those are not as satisfying because there's still questions. And it's not like there's DNA that proves that this person to the exclusion of all others or one in however many quadrillion, right? It could only be the person who did it. We don't have that here. And sometimes those are a little tougher to, I guess, kind of live with for lack of a better term. Yeah. And you just mentioned DNA, which made me think of something we were, you know, we talked about earlier, and that was the autopsy results in this case and the fact that Ryan had his wife cremated. Now, you could almost look at that two ways is if he was guilty and had murdered his wife, maybe he wanted that cremation to hide evidence to get rid of things that might come back to show he had something to do with it. But it's the same thing that had he not done that, had he not made that choice, could be helping him now. So, you know, a second autopsy, further medical testing on her body might have found something in her DNA that could have, you know, perhaps led to more answers. And, you know, fortunately, because she was cremated, you know, that that's not happening. And one other thing that made me think of this, sometimes when there's a suspicious death, the authorities will freeze any funerals or cremations and keep that body in evidence until they feel it's time to release it. So, you know, I'm a little bit surprised that didn't happen if they were so sure that Ryan had committed murder. Why would they let that cremation take place? Yeah, it's a good point you bring up because in most cases that we talk about where one spouse kills another and they pretty quickly determine that, you know, they want the person cremated. It's because they want to completely get rid of the chance that evidence from another autopsy or examination could come back to bite them. But there's a possibility here, if you subscribe to the camp, that Ryan is innocent, that having Sarah's body cremated could have actually worked against him. But what I will say is, you know, in the reporting and we did talk about it, they have her DNA. You know, he has fought to get it tested for, you know, possible genetic conditions that maybe could have caused her to pass out and drown. He just hasn't been successful in getting that to happen. Yeah, and I personally would love to see that happen. And, you know, her family deserves to know the truth. Now, maybe they believe that Ryan was guilty and he's right where he belongs. But at the same time, if this was my family, remember, I'd want that testing done to see if there's any possibility that she had some kind of condition or something that could have led to her death. I'd want to know the truth if it was my family member. Yeah, I'm with you on that. Now, I do believe they probably think that, uh, yeah, he did it. And they're fine with the outcome of the case. But like we said, he does have some, uh, or I shouldn't say some, he does have a lot of supporters. People are split on this case. And I don't know that that's all that unusual in a case where there isn't that bombshell piece of evidence, right? It is largely circumstantial. So you can see why people have varying opinions. And if you're in Ryan's camp, then you're, you're upset that he's there. You don't believe he should be behind bars. And if you believe he's guilty, then you're happy that he's where he belongs. And unfortunately, I just don't think we're ever going to know the truth in this case about what really happened that night. Yeah, I agree with you. I don't know that we ever will. But that's it for our episode on Sarah Widmer. As always, if you love the show, but haven't done so yet, take a minute, go out, leave a rating, leave a review. Also keep telling your friends, word of mouth about the criminology podcast really goes a long way. If you want to find us on social media, we're on every major platform, just search for criminology podcast on your favorites. You can also visit our website criminologypodcast.com to find more information about the show, past episodes and more. And if you want to join a discussion about the show and the cases we cover, head over to Facebook and search for the criminology podcast discussion in fans group. So that's it for another episode of criminology, but Morph and I will be back with all of you next Saturday night with a brand new episode. So until then for Mike and Morph, we'll talk to you next week. Take care, everyone.