This story contains adult content and language, along with references to sexual assault. Listener discretion is advised.

This story contains adult content and language, along with references to sexual assault. Listener discretion is advised.

And I would argue that some of these secrets that I'm revealing right now in this book are things that people just didn't know about the case, the reasons why it still was important, why in some ways, Dean Coral should be even more famous sin John Wayne Gacy because there were all these other things going on around his murders.

And I would argue that some of these secrets that I'm revealing right now in this book are things that people just didn't know about the case, the reasons why it still was important, why in some ways, Dean Coral should be even more famous sin John Wayne Gacy because there were all these other things going on around his murders.

I'm Kate Winkler Dawson, a nonfiction author and journalism professor in Austin, Texas. I'm also the co host of the podcast Buried Bones on Exactly Right, and throughout my career, research for my many audio and book projects has taken me around the world. On Wicked Words, I sit down with the people I've met along the way, amazing writers, journalists, fomakers, and podcasters who have investigated and reported on notorious true crime cases. This is about the choices writers make, both good and bad, and it's a deep dive into the unpublished details behind their stories. Dean Coral was a serial killer in Houston in the early nineteen seventies. He kidnapped and murdered more than two dozen missing teenage boys before he was murdered by one of his accomplices. Decades later, a forensic anthropologist discovered a box of remains from the case. She spent years using scientific tools to identify some of the unknown victims. Journalist Lisa Olsen tells me the story at the center of her book, The Scientist and the Serial Killer. I have heard of the story of Dean before, and you know, this is an awful story that I know has lived, I guess in infamy in Texas. There are quite a few people who had never heard of it outside of the state. You have a different focus for this book that I think is fascinating because I am absolutely fascinated with the work of forensic anthropologists, and I don't know enough about them. So this is what I'm counting on for you, is to tell me exactly what that is and how it relates to this case. So when you tell people at a dinner party, I've written this amazing book and they say, what's it about. What is your three paragraph pitch to them? What do you say it is about?

I'm Kate Winkler Dawson, a nonfiction author and journalism professor in Austin, Texas. I'm also the co host of the podcast Buried Bones on Exactly Right, and throughout my career, research for my many audio and book projects has taken me around the world. On Wicked Words, I sit down with the people I've met along the way, amazing writers, journalists, fomakers, and podcasters who have investigated and reported on notorious true crime cases. This is about the choices writers make, both good and bad, and it's a deep dive into the unpublished details behind their stories. Dean Coral was a serial killer in Houston in the early nineteen seventies. He kidnapped and murdered more than two dozen missing teenage boys before he was murdered by one of his accomplices. Decades later, a forensic anthropologist discovered a box of remains from the case. She spent years using scientific tools to identify some of the unknown victims. Journalist Lisa Olsen tells me the story at the center of her book, The Scientist and the Serial Killer. I have heard of the story of Dean before, and you know, this is an awful story that I know has lived, I guess in infamy in Texas. There are quite a few people who had never heard of it outside of the state. You have a different focus for this book that I think is fascinating because I am absolutely fascinated with the work of forensic anthropologists, and I don't know enough about them. So this is what I'm counting on for you, is to tell me exactly what that is and how it relates to this case. So when you tell people at a dinner party, I've written this amazing book and they say, what's it about. What is your three paragraph pitch to them? What do you say it is about?

This book is about what was an infamous murder case in the early seventies in Texas involving a man named Dean Coral, who was around here called the candy Man, who was linked after his murder, to the disappearance of more than two dozen young boys and young men in the Houston area, all of whom, with the exception of one or two, had been assumed to be not victims of any crime, but simply runaways. Their parents and their siblings and their friends were looking for them, but the police were not. So there was this discovery that generated national news. The Vatican, the Zvestia, the Russian Empire issued press releases condemning the Houston police for failing to notice how many young men had disappeared, because they found them their bones in these mass graves that were discovered only because the person who killed Dean Coral, who was one of his accomplices, led them to the burial grounds. And what I say about what my book is about is about what you never knew about that case. There was a lot that wasn't known because Coral was killed, he never lived to tell his story, and a third of his victims were not identified for decades. And so my story starts with a woman who comes to the Morgue in the mid two thousands as a forensic anthropologist. Her name is doctor Sharon Derek. She discovers these boxes of bones of unidentified teenagers, and she is completely floored because this is a case she heard growing up in Texas. This was a case that gave Texas teenagers nightmares about being kidnapped, about being disappeared, about being sexually assaulted and tortured. This was all of that, and she's just as pulled and shocked that there are so many boxes of bones of unidentified people who are approximately her age, boys and young mens who grew up in the same neighborhood where her grandparents lived, where her cousins grew up. And so she sets out on this journey to try to use modern forensic apology techniques to identify who they are. And in the course of that work, which does generate news at the time when she makes these discovery, she on earth's deeper truths about these cases that were never made public in the seventies and I think are still really important today, things like the fact that some of these boys were victims of what we would call today a sex trafficking ring, with some of those images had been sold to a worldwide network of pedophile and the fact that many of these boys really had been reported missing partly because their families were you know, didn't have the same kind of power as other families. Maybe they were led by single women, their parents didn't get the same attention, and so they were never identified even though they probably should have been at the time. You know, there was, of course a stigma to these crimes that persists today in that young men who are victims of sexual assault, even today, if you look at research by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, still don't feel empowered to talk about when they are assaulted or when someone attempts to assault them. And so an open secret among a generation of Houstonians and from these neighborhoods where these boys were taken, was that there were living victims. There were probably twice as many living victims who were still around, and so many of whom I interviewed who could talk about the near missus they had when the same pedophile tried to come after them, and that was also so suppressed. So, you know, I think it's an incredible story of scientific discovery by a woman, which is something, you know, a story I wanted to tell, but it's also a story that resonates today about you know, we need to pay more attention to the issue of the unidentified, which remains a huge problem. You know, there's just not enough resources to use these new forensic tools to identify people, and then the plight of missing persons and sex assault victims is still a big, big issue, you know. So that's why I felt like it was worth telling this story in a whole new way. So I tell people, you know, this is a story you thought you knew if you were a Houstonian, But I'm going to tell you a lot of things about what you didn't know. This isn't a who done it? It's a who was it? And what did it mean?

This book is about what was an infamous murder case in the early seventies in Texas involving a man named Dean Coral, who was around here called the candy Man, who was linked after his murder, to the disappearance of more than two dozen young boys and young men in the Houston area, all of whom, with the exception of one or two, had been assumed to be not victims of any crime, but simply runaways. Their parents and their siblings and their friends were looking for them, but the police were not. So there was this discovery that generated national news. The Vatican, the Zvestia, the Russian Empire issued press releases condemning the Houston police for failing to notice how many young men had disappeared, because they found them their bones in these mass graves that were discovered only because the person who killed Dean Coral, who was one of his accomplices, led them to the burial grounds. And what I say about what my book is about is about what you never knew about that case. There was a lot that wasn't known because Coral was killed, he never lived to tell his story, and a third of his victims were not identified for decades. And so my story starts with a woman who comes to the Morgue in the mid two thousands as a forensic anthropologist. Her name is doctor Sharon Derek. She discovers these boxes of bones of unidentified teenagers, and she is completely floored because this is a case she heard growing up in Texas. This was a case that gave Texas teenagers nightmares about being kidnapped, about being disappeared, about being sexually assaulted and tortured. This was all of that, and she's just as pulled and shocked that there are so many boxes of bones of unidentified people who are approximately her age, boys and young mens who grew up in the same neighborhood where her grandparents lived, where her cousins grew up. And so she sets out on this journey to try to use modern forensic apology techniques to identify who they are. And in the course of that work, which does generate news at the time when she makes these discovery, she on earth's deeper truths about these cases that were never made public in the seventies and I think are still really important today, things like the fact that some of these boys were victims of what we would call today a sex trafficking ring, with some of those images had been sold to a worldwide network of pedophile and the fact that many of these boys really had been reported missing partly because their families were you know, didn't have the same kind of power as other families. Maybe they were led by single women, their parents didn't get the same attention, and so they were never identified even though they probably should have been at the time. You know, there was, of course a stigma to these crimes that persists today in that young men who are victims of sexual assault, even today, if you look at research by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, still don't feel empowered to talk about when they are assaulted or when someone attempts to assault them. And so an open secret among a generation of Houstonians and from these neighborhoods where these boys were taken, was that there were living victims. There were probably twice as many living victims who were still around, and so many of whom I interviewed who could talk about the near missus they had when the same pedophile tried to come after them, and that was also so suppressed. So, you know, I think it's an incredible story of scientific discovery by a woman, which is something, you know, a story I wanted to tell, but it's also a story that resonates today about you know, we need to pay more attention to the issue of the unidentified, which remains a huge problem. You know, there's just not enough resources to use these new forensic tools to identify people, and then the plight of missing persons and sex assault victims is still a big, big issue, you know. So that's why I felt like it was worth telling this story in a whole new way. So I tell people, you know, this is a story you thought you knew if you were a Houstonian, But I'm going to tell you a lot of things about what you didn't know. This isn't a who done it? It's a who was it? And what did it mean?

Dean Coral was truly awful. I mean, when you hear all of the details of what happened to these young men and these boys, you know, it truly, truly is terrifying. One of the things that's so disconcerting about Dean Coral before we kind of get into that part of the story, just so everybody has context, is that he was a seemingly respected member of the community. You know, his parents had a business. And what a great cover up it was, and that's one of the things that alarms me is the of course, the idea that the serial killer is the next door neighbor. It is not the person who might look like an Edmund Kemper or someone who you know, like you look at it and it seems obvious, and Dean Coral did not seem obvious. Do you want to kind of go back and tell me a little bit about the background, just so that we can understand going forward when we meet Sharon the significance of what she found.

Dean Coral was truly awful. I mean, when you hear all of the details of what happened to these young men and these boys, you know, it truly, truly is terrifying. One of the things that's so disconcerting about Dean Coral before we kind of get into that part of the story, just so everybody has context, is that he was a seemingly respected member of the community. You know, his parents had a business. And what a great cover up it was, and that's one of the things that alarms me is the of course, the idea that the serial killer is the next door neighbor. It is not the person who might look like an Edmund Kemper or someone who you know, like you look at it and it seems obvious, and Dean Coral did not seem obvious. Do you want to kind of go back and tell me a little bit about the background, just so that we can understand going forward when we meet Sharon the significance of what she found.

Yes, So, Dean Coral was an electrician. He worked for the you know, city lighting and power company. He wasn't anybody who tracked it a lot of attention. And in the day his as you said, his mother owned a series of candy shops. That's why they called him the candy man some of the kids because he ran those shops with his mother. He literally mixed up recipes and made candy, praylans and things like that. That then some of these boys actually worked in the shops and leaned up or delivered and over time I think this would have attracted attention today, but in the seventies it really didn't. He befriended a lot of these kids, and he used these candy shops as sort of hangout places, and so some of these kids hung out at his candy shops, which tended to be near elementary schools. Most of them were in a neighborhood in Houston called the Houston Heights, which is a historic neighborhood with a lot of beautiful old Victorian houses, but in the seventies it was a little bit run down. It's kind of become a premier, you know, where he sought after neighborhood today, but back then there were a lot of rental properties. There were a lot of kids whose dads were World War two veterans, or parents were divorcing. There were a lot of issues, and some of these kids, he just would befriend kids, often poorer kids, and offer them a place to hang out, and he would also give them all kinds of gifts, many trips to the beach, he would let them ride on motorcycle. And then he started really soliciting these favors in return that obviously these boys didn't tell their parents about. And ultimately then he starts to kidnap and as you said, torture and kill other boys and uses two of the boys he's befriended to do that.

Yes, So, Dean Coral was an electrician. He worked for the you know, city lighting and power company. He wasn't anybody who tracked it a lot of attention. And in the day his as you said, his mother owned a series of candy shops. That's why they called him the candy man some of the kids because he ran those shops with his mother. He literally mixed up recipes and made candy, praylans and things like that. That then some of these boys actually worked in the shops and leaned up or delivered and over time I think this would have attracted attention today, but in the seventies it really didn't. He befriended a lot of these kids, and he used these candy shops as sort of hangout places, and so some of these kids hung out at his candy shops, which tended to be near elementary schools. Most of them were in a neighborhood in Houston called the Houston Heights, which is a historic neighborhood with a lot of beautiful old Victorian houses, but in the seventies it was a little bit run down. It's kind of become a premier, you know, where he sought after neighborhood today, but back then there were a lot of rental properties. There were a lot of kids whose dads were World War two veterans, or parents were divorcing. There were a lot of issues, and some of these kids, he just would befriend kids, often poorer kids, and offer them a place to hang out, and he would also give them all kinds of gifts, many trips to the beach, he would let them ride on motorcycle. And then he started really soliciting these favors in return that obviously these boys didn't tell their parents about. And ultimately then he starts to kidnap and as you said, torture and kill other boys and uses two of the boys he's befriended to do that.

And you know what I had remembered about the story was, you know, one of the boys the mother had trusted him, and in some ways, you know, he is that man who who, if the parents are involved, might see him as a big brother figure, someone who could be a positive influence. And then that goes back to focusing in on these vulnerable victims and who he's able to exploit because of you know, the way he looks in his standing. And there are no red flags. So when you talk about these young men being from this area and the heights, these boys, are these people who are very involved with their families or was it an array of involvement from the families.

And you know what I had remembered about the story was, you know, one of the boys the mother had trusted him, and in some ways, you know, he is that man who who, if the parents are involved, might see him as a big brother figure, someone who could be a positive influence. And then that goes back to focusing in on these vulnerable victims and who he's able to exploit because of you know, the way he looks in his standing. And there are no red flags. So when you talk about these young men being from this area and the heights, these boys, are these people who are very involved with their families or was it an array of involvement from the families.

I mean, almost all of these kids were reported missing by their families. They weren't weren't runaways, they weren't estranged by their from their families. The police tried to characterize them as in some way sort of fringe kids who to excuse the fact that they were all dismissed as runaways. But when you look at the profiles of the children, you know, some of them are as young as thirteen. There are differences, but there are some really big red flags that today you know, in the era of amber alerts would have certainly roseen too the level of you know, this is clearly an abduction. One of the kids, who was the younger, had packed for a trip with his family that were going to be leaving the next day. He and his buddy went to the pool. You know, they only had basically their swimming suits and towels and some extra clothes in a bag, and they both disappeared. This was a you know, a really good church going kid who went to parochial school. His friend had had a little bit of problems, but the friend was a good kid too, you know, kid who teachers liked, was very close to his mom and brother. And they just disappear off the face of the earth. And those parents hired a private detective. They put up flyers all over the neighborhood. They made some of the most noise of any parents. And yet there was no listing of these boys as kidnap or murder victims. They were just dismissed as his runaways. There was a pair of brothers who disappeared together. They were only fifteen and thirteen. Their dad talked with the police about suspecting that they had been photographed by a porn ring and gave names to the police, and the police did not follow up. I mean, it's kind of shocking. Later on, you have kids who had jobs, girlfriends, cars, who leave behind their jobs, their girlfriends and their cars, and the police assume their runaways. Why would a kid who was eighteen year old year old who was engaged to be married, who had a good job, leave his family and not even take his own car and just disappear a few weeks before high school gra You know, these things defy it defies logic today that they would have dismissed all these kids as runaways. And that's kind of the heartbreaking thing when you see when you read all these old police files, in the missing persons files, is so often it was mothers telling these stories. Fathers too, you know, fathers too are pressing for answers, and they're just being dismissed as this is going to you know, this is just a runaway. We have too many of these cases and the police just don't pull them out of the pile. Now, granted, at the time and today too, you still do have a lot of kids running away from home. You have some kids who are estranged from their families for a lot of reasons, you know, And that was true in the seventies too. You know, there were kids who were having fights with their parents over their length, their hair, or their sexual preferences or who they were dating. And that was true too. But there were certainly a huge number of red flags that were raised by the parents in these cases. And that's kind of what's heartbreaking about the fact that the murders are not discovered and tell really what I reveal, at least thirty to thirty five boys had been killed at the time. The official count was twenty seven, but doctor Derek has proven that there were more.

I mean, almost all of these kids were reported missing by their families. They weren't weren't runaways, they weren't estranged by their from their families. The police tried to characterize them as in some way sort of fringe kids who to excuse the fact that they were all dismissed as runaways. But when you look at the profiles of the children, you know, some of them are as young as thirteen. There are differences, but there are some really big red flags that today you know, in the era of amber alerts would have certainly roseen too the level of you know, this is clearly an abduction. One of the kids, who was the younger, had packed for a trip with his family that were going to be leaving the next day. He and his buddy went to the pool. You know, they only had basically their swimming suits and towels and some extra clothes in a bag, and they both disappeared. This was a you know, a really good church going kid who went to parochial school. His friend had had a little bit of problems, but the friend was a good kid too, you know, kid who teachers liked, was very close to his mom and brother. And they just disappear off the face of the earth. And those parents hired a private detective. They put up flyers all over the neighborhood. They made some of the most noise of any parents. And yet there was no listing of these boys as kidnap or murder victims. They were just dismissed as his runaways. There was a pair of brothers who disappeared together. They were only fifteen and thirteen. Their dad talked with the police about suspecting that they had been photographed by a porn ring and gave names to the police, and the police did not follow up. I mean, it's kind of shocking. Later on, you have kids who had jobs, girlfriends, cars, who leave behind their jobs, their girlfriends and their cars, and the police assume their runaways. Why would a kid who was eighteen year old year old who was engaged to be married, who had a good job, leave his family and not even take his own car and just disappear a few weeks before high school gra You know, these things defy it defies logic today that they would have dismissed all these kids as runaways. And that's kind of the heartbreaking thing when you see when you read all these old police files, in the missing persons files, is so often it was mothers telling these stories. Fathers too, you know, fathers too are pressing for answers, and they're just being dismissed as this is going to you know, this is just a runaway. We have too many of these cases and the police just don't pull them out of the pile. Now, granted, at the time and today too, you still do have a lot of kids running away from home. You have some kids who are estranged from their families for a lot of reasons, you know, And that was true in the seventies too. You know, there were kids who were having fights with their parents over their length, their hair, or their sexual preferences or who they were dating. And that was true too. But there were certainly a huge number of red flags that were raised by the parents in these cases. And that's kind of what's heartbreaking about the fact that the murders are not discovered and tell really what I reveal, at least thirty to thirty five boys had been killed at the time. The official count was twenty seven, but doctor Derek has proven that there were more.

Did you address in the book about the connection with John Wayne Gacy and that part of the porn ring? Is that something that you go into.

Did you address in the book about the connection with John Wayne Gacy and that part of the porn ring? Is that something that you go into.

John Wayne Gaysey. There was a documentary called The Clown and the Candy Man which explores the connections potential connections between Gaysey and Dean Coral. There were some coincidences and some potential connections there. But I am connecting Dean Coral to another person who was a pornographer in Houston, who was prosecuted in federal court, who had in his possession the photos of eleven of his victims, and who was connected to other men who stayed in Houston and who continued to exploit other teens after these were discovered, and who were never openly questioned by police according to files I've found, or were prosecuted as either accomplices or potential accomplices to these murders, even though they were clearly involved in exploiting these same boys at least eleven of the boys about a third of the victims. The Clown and the Candyman documentary does explore the idea that there might be links between Dean Coral and John Wayne Gacy, who were both linked to different ornography rings. I have not been able to confirm that there's a direct link between the two of them, but there certainly is a link between what Dean Coral was doing in a pornography ring.

John Wayne Gaysey. There was a documentary called The Clown and the Candy Man which explores the connections potential connections between Gaysey and Dean Coral. There were some coincidences and some potential connections there. But I am connecting Dean Coral to another person who was a pornographer in Houston, who was prosecuted in federal court, who had in his possession the photos of eleven of his victims, and who was connected to other men who stayed in Houston and who continued to exploit other teens after these were discovered, and who were never openly questioned by police according to files I've found, or were prosecuted as either accomplices or potential accomplices to these murders, even though they were clearly involved in exploiting these same boys at least eleven of the boys about a third of the victims. The Clown and the Candyman documentary does explore the idea that there might be links between Dean Coral and John Wayne Gacy, who were both linked to different ornography rings. I have not been able to confirm that there's a direct link between the two of them, but there certainly is a link between what Dean Coral was doing in a pornography ring.

If police had been paying attention and believes that they were not just runaways, as these boys are disappearing over time, what have it been difficult for the police to connect these boys to Dean Coral Or was he planning this so well that even if they were looking for something, it would be hard because nobody saw them with him? Or whatever The case might be, would they have been able to make the connection and save lives much sooner?

If police had been paying attention and believes that they were not just runaways, as these boys are disappearing over time, what have it been difficult for the police to connect these boys to Dean Coral Or was he planning this so well that even if they were looking for something, it would be hard because nobody saw them with him? Or whatever The case might be, would they have been able to make the connection and save lives much sooner?

You know, we're not talking about a modern homicide detective unit, of course. However, I think you know, looking back, you know clearly if you look at the list of victims, the known murder starts in nineteen seventy and the first victim was snatched off the street. It was hitchhiking, So I don't think they could have connected Dean Coral to him. But the second and third victims, Danny Yates and Jimmy Glass. Janny Yates brother told me that he could have identified Dean Coral, and that his brother and he had met Coral when they were walking with James Glass after failing to get into a drive in Cinema. They're picked up by Dean Coral and taken around until the elder brother said, you know, you got to let us out. But after that incident, it was a short time after that that the other two boys who were taken by Coral and there both disappear. Now that little brother, that boy, who would have been fifteen at the time, said I could have told them who that was. I would have told them that my brother and James Glass had his phone number, I could have given them a description. Nobody ever asked me, nobody were listened to me. And that's part of what is the tragedy of this book is when you look at the stories of the boys and their friends, which I try to reconstruct really by interviewing their best friends at the time. Because so many people have carried these stories of these losses for so many years, you see that if the police had been able to talk to more of these teens and got more information, there would have been things that would have led them to Dean Coral. You know, later on Victims, he took the two boys who were washing to the swimming pool. Mally Winkle had worked for Dean Coral at his candy shop. His friend David had gone there to the candy shop. You know, there were other kids who were directly connected to the candy shop who disappeared from the same neighborhood or from other neighborhoods around the heights. So if you know, if they had done some sort of sophisticated analysis, I think they could have they could have seen these connections to Dean Coral. But as you say, the parents of you know, Mally's mom did not suspect Dean Coral. She thought he was a good guy. She thought he was kind of a big brother type looking out for her kid. Later on, he killed Billy Balch, who was a kid whose parents also trusted Dean Coral, who Billy had delivered candy for Coral at his shop. And Billy and his brother were both killed by Dean Coral in separate abductions. But his parents went to them, went to Dean and said, you know, are boys missing. Can you help us? Because they thought Dean would be somebody who could help ask questions. And of course, you know, Deane says, I know nothing about it, so it would it might have been difficult to solve. However, you know, I show in the that the leadership at the police department at the time were very dismissive of these young boys missing persons and of their parents and also you know, tried to say, oh wait, there wasn't anything that would have connected them, even though there was at the time a map published in the Houston Chronicle in the Houston Post that showed how a number of these victims actually lived just a couple of blocks from one of the known accomplices. Because Coral. The murders are discovered because a teenager named Elmer Wayne Henley kills Dean Coral when Coral is killing yet trying to kill yet another couple of his friends. He's already seen a whole bunch of his other friends murdered by Dean Coral, and he's done nothing to help them. But he decides enough enough, and he picks up a gun and sheets and kills Dean Coral. At that point, you know, the police don't have too much trouble finding the other victims missing persons in the case files because so many of them were Elmer Wayne Henley's classmates, went to the same junior high school, so many of them lived within or three blocks of Elma Wayne Henley, and so, you know, after the fact, the police acknowledged, you know, at least the detectives acknowledged that there were there were things that would have led them to the connections if they looked at the time, though you know, there wasn't There weren't abe alerts, There weren't you know, awareness of sexual predators. There weren't computers to sort of analyze the locations of these kinds of disappearances.

You know, we're not talking about a modern homicide detective unit, of course. However, I think you know, looking back, you know clearly if you look at the list of victims, the known murder starts in nineteen seventy and the first victim was snatched off the street. It was hitchhiking, So I don't think they could have connected Dean Coral to him. But the second and third victims, Danny Yates and Jimmy Glass. Janny Yates brother told me that he could have identified Dean Coral, and that his brother and he had met Coral when they were walking with James Glass after failing to get into a drive in Cinema. They're picked up by Dean Coral and taken around until the elder brother said, you know, you got to let us out. But after that incident, it was a short time after that that the other two boys who were taken by Coral and there both disappear. Now that little brother, that boy, who would have been fifteen at the time, said I could have told them who that was. I would have told them that my brother and James Glass had his phone number, I could have given them a description. Nobody ever asked me, nobody were listened to me. And that's part of what is the tragedy of this book is when you look at the stories of the boys and their friends, which I try to reconstruct really by interviewing their best friends at the time. Because so many people have carried these stories of these losses for so many years, you see that if the police had been able to talk to more of these teens and got more information, there would have been things that would have led them to Dean Coral. You know, later on Victims, he took the two boys who were washing to the swimming pool. Mally Winkle had worked for Dean Coral at his candy shop. His friend David had gone there to the candy shop. You know, there were other kids who were directly connected to the candy shop who disappeared from the same neighborhood or from other neighborhoods around the heights. So if you know, if they had done some sort of sophisticated analysis, I think they could have they could have seen these connections to Dean Coral. But as you say, the parents of you know, Mally's mom did not suspect Dean Coral. She thought he was a good guy. She thought he was kind of a big brother type looking out for her kid. Later on, he killed Billy Balch, who was a kid whose parents also trusted Dean Coral, who Billy had delivered candy for Coral at his shop. And Billy and his brother were both killed by Dean Coral in separate abductions. But his parents went to them, went to Dean and said, you know, are boys missing. Can you help us? Because they thought Dean would be somebody who could help ask questions. And of course, you know, Deane says, I know nothing about it, so it would it might have been difficult to solve. However, you know, I show in the that the leadership at the police department at the time were very dismissive of these young boys missing persons and of their parents and also you know, tried to say, oh wait, there wasn't anything that would have connected them, even though there was at the time a map published in the Houston Chronicle in the Houston Post that showed how a number of these victims actually lived just a couple of blocks from one of the known accomplices. Because Coral. The murders are discovered because a teenager named Elmer Wayne Henley kills Dean Coral when Coral is killing yet trying to kill yet another couple of his friends. He's already seen a whole bunch of his other friends murdered by Dean Coral, and he's done nothing to help them. But he decides enough enough, and he picks up a gun and sheets and kills Dean Coral. At that point, you know, the police don't have too much trouble finding the other victims missing persons in the case files because so many of them were Elmer Wayne Henley's classmates, went to the same junior high school, so many of them lived within or three blocks of Elma Wayne Henley, and so, you know, after the fact, the police acknowledged, you know, at least the detectives acknowledged that there were there were things that would have led them to the connections if they looked at the time, though you know, there wasn't There weren't abe alerts, There weren't you know, awareness of sexual predators. There weren't computers to sort of analyze the locations of these kinds of disappearances.

People were hitchhiking. I mean, hitchhiking was a normal thing during this time period too, So clearly it's a much less vigilant time period than we're in right now, particularly with kids.

People were hitchhiking. I mean, hitchhiking was a normal thing during this time period too, So clearly it's a much less vigilant time period than we're in right now, particularly with kids.

Yeah, absolutely people were hitchhiking, but people also really felt a lot more safe about just walking or riding their bike to friends' houses. You know, a lot of these kids were taken during the day. It was just a different time, So I try to convey that too. I don't think these parents were negligent. I don't think, you know, like I think at the time the police tried to claim that they were. But nearly all of these kids, with the exception of I think on, was immediately reported missing by their parents, and there were details provided in the case where the boy wasn't reported missing. He was a little older than the other victims, and like some of the other victims, his name was Roy Bunton. He had kind of fought with his mom about the length of his hair. He was nineteen, He had a job, and so his family did think that he had just left home and that he had gone off to start his own life somewhere else because there had been conflicts and you got to remember too, of course, and I try to paint this world for everyone. You know, this clearly wasn't the connected world we have today where everyone has cell phones a geolocation. You know, people had their home phones and sometimes the home phones got disconnected. You know, people moved. Some of these families used payphones or neighbors' phones to call the police to make the reports. Clearly, you know when a kid went missing. In the case of one of these kids, that is the first kid that Sharon identifies, Randy Hart, Randy was riding his bike to his job at a gas station. Randy doesn't come home the first night that his mob doesn't worry right away because she thinks maybe Randy decided to stay the night with one of his friends. Sometimes he did that. It wasn't as easy to call home. They didn't have a home phone, so she didn't worry till the next day when he didn't come home. But that was understandable at the time. It was just a lot harder to get in touch and stay in touch.

Yeah, absolutely people were hitchhiking, but people also really felt a lot more safe about just walking or riding their bike to friends' houses. You know, a lot of these kids were taken during the day. It was just a different time, So I try to convey that too. I don't think these parents were negligent. I don't think, you know, like I think at the time the police tried to claim that they were. But nearly all of these kids, with the exception of I think on, was immediately reported missing by their parents, and there were details provided in the case where the boy wasn't reported missing. He was a little older than the other victims, and like some of the other victims, his name was Roy Bunton. He had kind of fought with his mom about the length of his hair. He was nineteen, He had a job, and so his family did think that he had just left home and that he had gone off to start his own life somewhere else because there had been conflicts and you got to remember too, of course, and I try to paint this world for everyone. You know, this clearly wasn't the connected world we have today where everyone has cell phones a geolocation. You know, people had their home phones and sometimes the home phones got disconnected. You know, people moved. Some of these families used payphones or neighbors' phones to call the police to make the reports. Clearly, you know when a kid went missing. In the case of one of these kids, that is the first kid that Sharon identifies, Randy Hart, Randy was riding his bike to his job at a gas station. Randy doesn't come home the first night that his mob doesn't worry right away because she thinks maybe Randy decided to stay the night with one of his friends. Sometimes he did that. It wasn't as easy to call home. They didn't have a home phone, so she didn't worry till the next day when he didn't come home. But that was understandable at the time. It was just a lot harder to get in touch and stay in touch.

Tell me a little bit about the accomplices, which I mean, it's incredible that he had one, let alone two young men. One I think you know, we've had an author on here talking about her extensive interviews with Elmer Wayne Henley, who was supposed to be a victim it sounded like, and then turns out to be somebody who was forced to work with Dean Coral. Tell me about the dynamic between Coral and these two young men who were involved here, and ultimately, you know, Henley ends up shooting and killing Coral.

Tell me a little bit about the accomplices, which I mean, it's incredible that he had one, let alone two young men. One I think you know, we've had an author on here talking about her extensive interviews with Elmer Wayne Henley, who was supposed to be a victim it sounded like, and then turns out to be somebody who was forced to work with Dean Coral. Tell me about the dynamic between Coral and these two young men who were involved here, and ultimately, you know, Henley ends up shooting and killing Coral.

So Coral has a county shop, like I said, in the heights, near an elementary school. And one of the kids who goes to a shop's name is David Brooks. And David Brooks parents had a messy divorce. His mom moved to Beaumont. She was a nurse. He tried living with his mom for a while. They didn't get along. He moved back with his dad, who had another wife and other children from another mother. He didn't get along very well with his dad, so he started hanging out more and more with Dean Coral. Coral does what we now would call grooming. He pays David to accept blowjobs, you know, and David, as a young kid, sort of thinks, well, this is an easy way to make money. Over time, David Brooks becomes aware that Dean Coral is snatching and killing other kids, and he doesn't do anything about it. At that point, Coral is sort of his surrogate father. He's basically living with Coral. He becomes involved in inviting kids to quote party at Coral's place. Corals Squirrel really doesn't drink himself, but he always has alcoholic drugs a plenty for kids in the neighborhood. You know, in the old days, he would have candy it his candy shop. He would offer to take kids to the beach or fishing, and the parties were part of that lure. David becomes somebody who invites people to parties. So David invites his friend Elma Wayne Henley to one of those parties. And Henley's version is that he thinks the first time he was supposed to be a victim. But in Henley, Coral finds someone who's even more willing than David Brooks to invite people he knows David prior to bringing Henley to Coral's house, and you know, of course, there were a lot of kids who partied with Coral who were never killed. Henley starts inviting people he knows even more than Brooks. I think Brooks from the get go, is a little worried that if he invites friends of his or people he knows directly, you know, that could be traced back to him. But Henley seems to be have no compunction about, you know, inviting his neighbors Mally Winkle and David Hill. The guys do we talked to the two boys who were wearing their swimming suits. He claims he didn't know about that. But anyway, by the time he's involved, his friends have already been killed by Dean Coral, and he gets involved in in inviting people he does know well to party with Coral, including Franka Gary, and after Franka Gary is tortured and killed, Elmer Wayne Henley becomes the boyfriend of Frank's girlfriend and then and then Elmer Wayne Henley brings in another neighbor of his, Mark Scott. He's there. He's part of it, either in the body disposal crew or the recruitment clew and two other boys from his neighborhood who went to school with our broad end. The murders accelerate when Henley comes aboard and how Antley tells Sharon uh doctor Derek he came to enjoy killing it became something he liked. David Brooks was never as fourth in interviews as Henley was. Henley sort of enjoyed doing a lot of interviews. Lately, the Texas prison system has cut down those interviews. He's not allowed to talk to the press anymore, but for years he took some pleasure in it. Maybe that was his way of compensating, or maybe, you know, helping to identify the victims was his way of coping. I don't know, but there's no question that there were a lot of people. The number of murders accelerated after Elmer Wayne Henley became involved. But we also know more about who was killed because Elmer Wayne Henley cooperated with police and provided information about the names of the victims.

So Coral has a county shop, like I said, in the heights, near an elementary school. And one of the kids who goes to a shop's name is David Brooks. And David Brooks parents had a messy divorce. His mom moved to Beaumont. She was a nurse. He tried living with his mom for a while. They didn't get along. He moved back with his dad, who had another wife and other children from another mother. He didn't get along very well with his dad, so he started hanging out more and more with Dean Coral. Coral does what we now would call grooming. He pays David to accept blowjobs, you know, and David, as a young kid, sort of thinks, well, this is an easy way to make money. Over time, David Brooks becomes aware that Dean Coral is snatching and killing other kids, and he doesn't do anything about it. At that point, Coral is sort of his surrogate father. He's basically living with Coral. He becomes involved in inviting kids to quote party at Coral's place. Corals Squirrel really doesn't drink himself, but he always has alcoholic drugs a plenty for kids in the neighborhood. You know, in the old days, he would have candy it his candy shop. He would offer to take kids to the beach or fishing, and the parties were part of that lure. David becomes somebody who invites people to parties. So David invites his friend Elma Wayne Henley to one of those parties. And Henley's version is that he thinks the first time he was supposed to be a victim. But in Henley, Coral finds someone who's even more willing than David Brooks to invite people he knows David prior to bringing Henley to Coral's house, and you know, of course, there were a lot of kids who partied with Coral who were never killed. Henley starts inviting people he knows even more than Brooks. I think Brooks from the get go, is a little worried that if he invites friends of his or people he knows directly, you know, that could be traced back to him. But Henley seems to be have no compunction about, you know, inviting his neighbors Mally Winkle and David Hill. The guys do we talked to the two boys who were wearing their swimming suits. He claims he didn't know about that. But anyway, by the time he's involved, his friends have already been killed by Dean Coral, and he gets involved in in inviting people he does know well to party with Coral, including Franka Gary, and after Franka Gary is tortured and killed, Elmer Wayne Henley becomes the boyfriend of Frank's girlfriend and then and then Elmer Wayne Henley brings in another neighbor of his, Mark Scott. He's there. He's part of it, either in the body disposal crew or the recruitment clew and two other boys from his neighborhood who went to school with our broad end. The murders accelerate when Henley comes aboard and how Antley tells Sharon uh doctor Derek he came to enjoy killing it became something he liked. David Brooks was never as fourth in interviews as Henley was. Henley sort of enjoyed doing a lot of interviews. Lately, the Texas prison system has cut down those interviews. He's not allowed to talk to the press anymore, but for years he took some pleasure in it. Maybe that was his way of compensating, or maybe, you know, helping to identify the victims was his way of coping. I don't know, but there's no question that there were a lot of people. The number of murders accelerated after Elmer Wayne Henley became involved. But we also know more about who was killed because Elmer Wayne Henley cooperated with police and provided information about the names of the victims.

Why do you think that Dean Coral is not as well known as John Wayne Gacy? First I thought homophobia, but that would not be the case. Is it the vision of boys being buried in Gaysey's house yard wherever it was, versus Dean Coral who had kind of taken them off site, or what do you think that that is? Where there's this war around John Wayne Gacy, but really not around Dean Coral. At least the people that I know outside of the state of Texas were not that familiar with this case.

Why do you think that Dean Coral is not as well known as John Wayne Gacy? First I thought homophobia, but that would not be the case. Is it the vision of boys being buried in Gaysey's house yard wherever it was, versus Dean Coral who had kind of taken them off site, or what do you think that that is? Where there's this war around John Wayne Gacy, but really not around Dean Coral. At least the people that I know outside of the state of Texas were not that familiar with this case.

I think it's because Dean Coral was killed in nineteen seventy three. He didn't have three decades to develop a following as a serial killer, you know, he didn't. In fact, there's an episode in the book where I talk about how a prosecutor at Elmer Wayne Henley's retrial because Elmer Wyne Henley did it get a lot of publicity at the time. But he wasn't the main killer. He wasn't the guy who did all of these murders. You know, he was connected to maybe half, but he wasn't this main killer. He wasn't the instigator of everything. He was a henchman, you know, or a victim, depending on how you want to look at things. Dean Coral is dead. He never can tell his life story. His family doesn't tell his life story. They don't go after the accomplices, so that doesn't come out. Only some of the murders are discussed at a trial. There's only six or seven of the cases that are discussed. Trials are held in the early seventies and the appeals are you know, quickly dispatched that no one was sentenced to death. You know, Gaysey was sentenced to death, and the death penalty generates more attention. You know, Elma, Wayne Henley is serving life sentences and David Brooks never gave any interviews and died of COVID. So there are reasons that And I would argue that some of these secrets that I'm revealing right now in this book are things that people just didn't know about the case. That the reasons why it still was important, why in some ways Dean Coral should be even more famous than John Wayne Gacy because there were all these other things going on around his murders. During Ellmerwayne Henley's retrial, as I said, for a while, Emma, Wayne Henley was just sucking up the publicity and really excited about maybe being a movie during the retrial because his first convictions were overturned because there was some there was a lot of communication between the press and the members of the jury, and so I judge Grantedwayne Henley retroll and corpus Christie and they have it at this courthouse that in the seventies was very modern. It looked like a Jetsons movie set. Fear to do live action jetsons, you would set it at the Corpus Christie Courthouse. But anyway, there's this weird scene where Henley during the trial, passes the prosecutor on the way to the bathroom and he says to the prosecutor, you know, he's kind of upset about the fact that Gasey has broken his record for the number of victims because at the time, you know, in the modern era of homicide investigations, Dean Coral was considered, you know, the number one killer in terms of the number of victims. And so Henley says, you know, this bothers me that Gasey, you know, is now being creudits having more victims. If you give me a deal in this case, I'll tell you where some more bodies are. So there's this sense of, you know, he did want to be infamous. Yeah, but you know the killing of Kral made the tension and the interest in Coral of short drays. You know, his story is sort of lost when his life ends.

I think it's because Dean Coral was killed in nineteen seventy three. He didn't have three decades to develop a following as a serial killer, you know, he didn't. In fact, there's an episode in the book where I talk about how a prosecutor at Elmer Wayne Henley's retrial because Elmer Wyne Henley did it get a lot of publicity at the time. But he wasn't the main killer. He wasn't the guy who did all of these murders. You know, he was connected to maybe half, but he wasn't this main killer. He wasn't the instigator of everything. He was a henchman, you know, or a victim, depending on how you want to look at things. Dean Coral is dead. He never can tell his life story. His family doesn't tell his life story. They don't go after the accomplices, so that doesn't come out. Only some of the murders are discussed at a trial. There's only six or seven of the cases that are discussed. Trials are held in the early seventies and the appeals are you know, quickly dispatched that no one was sentenced to death. You know, Gaysey was sentenced to death, and the death penalty generates more attention. You know, Elma, Wayne Henley is serving life sentences and David Brooks never gave any interviews and died of COVID. So there are reasons that And I would argue that some of these secrets that I'm revealing right now in this book are things that people just didn't know about the case. That the reasons why it still was important, why in some ways Dean Coral should be even more famous than John Wayne Gacy because there were all these other things going on around his murders. During Ellmerwayne Henley's retrial, as I said, for a while, Emma, Wayne Henley was just sucking up the publicity and really excited about maybe being a movie during the retrial because his first convictions were overturned because there was some there was a lot of communication between the press and the members of the jury, and so I judge Grantedwayne Henley retroll and corpus Christie and they have it at this courthouse that in the seventies was very modern. It looked like a Jetsons movie set. Fear to do live action jetsons, you would set it at the Corpus Christie Courthouse. But anyway, there's this weird scene where Henley during the trial, passes the prosecutor on the way to the bathroom and he says to the prosecutor, you know, he's kind of upset about the fact that Gasey has broken his record for the number of victims because at the time, you know, in the modern era of homicide investigations, Dean Coral was considered, you know, the number one killer in terms of the number of victims. And so Henley says, you know, this bothers me that Gasey, you know, is now being creudits having more victims. If you give me a deal in this case, I'll tell you where some more bodies are. So there's this sense of, you know, he did want to be infamous. Yeah, but you know the killing of Kral made the tension and the interest in Coral of short drays. You know, his story is sort of lost when his life ends.

Did the prosecutor take him up on that? I guess Shorthand what happens after there's this confrontation with Henley and Coral. Coral ends up dead. My memory is that Henley was the one who, you know, was able to tell them about the boat house where a lot of the bodies were. And then I can't remember did he turn in David Brooks or did David Brooks realize something was happening and he spoke to the police first.

Did the prosecutor take him up on that? I guess Shorthand what happens after there's this confrontation with Henley and Coral. Coral ends up dead. My memory is that Henley was the one who, you know, was able to tell them about the boat house where a lot of the bodies were. And then I can't remember did he turn in David Brooks or did David Brooks realize something was happening and he spoke to the police first.

So you're right, you know, Elder Wayne Henley kills Coral when cREL tries to kill two more of his friends, finally cracks. They called the police, and then he decides he tells the police. He doesn't tell them that he helped korl kill people, but he tells police that he knows where Coral kept a lot of other bodies. I mean, he leads the Pasadena police to this boat shed that Coral had rented in Houston, and it's every bit as grizzly as the Gaycy murger scene. You know, there's awful, a huge excavation that last for two days and they on earth what they think are fifteen bodies, but there's even more there. Later they find extra bones and they realize, you know, the medical examagers at the time realized they probably left some behind. And that's part of the revelations of the book what was really in that boatshed? And then David Brooks separately, when he's starting to hear about what's happening at the boatshed, he goes to Houston Police and offers to give a statement, and he gives a statement, and then eventually he and Elmr Wayne Henley, not eventually but very quickly go and lead police to two other locations. Actually Henley does shows them a couple more bodies in a woods in an area near Coral's family had a fishing cabinet in East Texas. And then Brooks and Henley together help the police search this big beach on the Gulf of Mexico where they find more graves. So Brooks is assisting as well. Brooks, though was never as forthcoming about his involvement in the murders to his death, he claimed that he was more accessory after the fact that he was coerce, that he was controlled by this man who was so much older than him and had so much impact on his life. Now, I think you know, Brooks was obviously an accomplice as guilty as Henley was in many ways, but Henley was more forthcoming about his involvement and what he did, and his active involvement in killing people.

So you're right, you know, Elder Wayne Henley kills Coral when cREL tries to kill two more of his friends, finally cracks. They called the police, and then he decides he tells the police. He doesn't tell them that he helped korl kill people, but he tells police that he knows where Coral kept a lot of other bodies. I mean, he leads the Pasadena police to this boat shed that Coral had rented in Houston, and it's every bit as grizzly as the Gaycy murger scene. You know, there's awful, a huge excavation that last for two days and they on earth what they think are fifteen bodies, but there's even more there. Later they find extra bones and they realize, you know, the medical examagers at the time realized they probably left some behind. And that's part of the revelations of the book what was really in that boatshed? And then David Brooks separately, when he's starting to hear about what's happening at the boatshed, he goes to Houston Police and offers to give a statement, and he gives a statement, and then eventually he and Elmr Wayne Henley, not eventually but very quickly go and lead police to two other locations. Actually Henley does shows them a couple more bodies in a woods in an area near Coral's family had a fishing cabinet in East Texas. And then Brooks and Henley together help the police search this big beach on the Gulf of Mexico where they find more graves. So Brooks is assisting as well. Brooks, though was never as forthcoming about his involvement in the murders to his death, he claimed that he was more accessory after the fact that he was coerce, that he was controlled by this man who was so much older than him and had so much impact on his life. Now, I think you know, Brooks was obviously an accomplice as guilty as Henley was in many ways, but Henley was more forthcoming about his involvement and what he did, and his active involvement in killing people.

He knew we're in Texas. Why was this not a death penalty case? I mean, not taking politics out of this, I'm surprised that either of these men were not put on death row or am I wrong about that?

He knew we're in Texas. Why was this not a death penalty case? I mean, not taking politics out of this, I'm surprised that either of these men were not put on death row or am I wrong about that?

If you remember in the seventies that death penalty was overturned, Oh yeah, by the Supreme Court for a period, and these murders occurred during the period when the penalty had been overturned. The Texas legislature was putting in a new death penalty statute that would pass muster and not be discriminatory. That death penalty was overturned because so many more people of color were being put to death, particularly in the South. They passed a statute that the prosecutor at the time determined could not be applied to this case. That the case, the period of time, and the wording the statute made it impossible for Harris County, which was is still one of the counties that most often sought the death penalty. They felt it was impossible for them to prosecute either of these teenagers for capital murder with the penalty of death. Yeah, okay, so it's kind of a fluke procedural blip in the history books that these two boys are exempt from the death penalty. Now, today they would not have been prosecuted either, because the death penalties not applied to juveniles. But in the seventies, it certainly was, in the eighties, it certainly was in the nineties, it certainly was.

If you remember in the seventies that death penalty was overturned, Oh yeah, by the Supreme Court for a period, and these murders occurred during the period when the penalty had been overturned. The Texas legislature was putting in a new death penalty statute that would pass muster and not be discriminatory. That death penalty was overturned because so many more people of color were being put to death, particularly in the South. They passed a statute that the prosecutor at the time determined could not be applied to this case. That the case, the period of time, and the wording the statute made it impossible for Harris County, which was is still one of the counties that most often sought the death penalty. They felt it was impossible for them to prosecute either of these teenagers for capital murder with the penalty of death. Yeah, okay, so it's kind of a fluke procedural blip in the history books that these two boys are exempt from the death penalty. Now, today they would not have been prosecuted either, because the death penalties not applied to juveniles. But in the seventies, it certainly was, in the eighties, it certainly was in the nineties, it certainly was.

Let me kind of switch over to the end of that story and the beginning of doctor Derek's story. So they both are given life in prison, both them, both of these young men. Is that right?

Let me kind of switch over to the end of that story and the beginning of doctor Derek's story. So they both are given life in prison, both them, both of these young men. Is that right?

That's right?

That's right?

And you said Brooks died of COVID, but Henley is still alive. Is that right?

And you said Brooks died of COVID, but Henley is still alive. Is that right?

Yes, he is still alive.

Yes, he is still alive.

So now that we think case closed. And then you've described the scene where tell me the year again, where doctor Derek sees these this box of bones and kind of reopens this case. How does that story start?

So now that we think case closed. And then you've described the scene where tell me the year again, where doctor Derek sees these this box of bones and kind of reopens this case. How does that story start?

Well, so it's in the early two thousands when she gets this job at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office, and she's thrilled because she has just become a forensic anthropologist, and she's really she knows that the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office has this backlog of three hundred to four hundred unidentified people. She knows about that because she's been in Harris County working with the health department doing analysis of murderers and deaths of young children and trying to do preventive work. And then she talks the me who she knows from other work into trying to assign her as an anthropologist, and somebody is working to develop more of us secialten forensic anthropology to work on those cases, because she knows that A, there are murders that are not being solved because of all that backlog of unidentified. B that there are families out there who still need answers. And see, she knows that the technology has evolved, you know, and that so that so many of these cases are from the seventies, the eighties, the nineties when DNA wasn't available, and so since you know, the late eighties, early nineties, DNA becomes a tool for identifications. Of the seventies, the main tools they had really were teeth, you know, dental work. Did the kids go to a dentist or not. If they didn't, boy, it could be really hard for them to be identified. If they broke a bone, an next ray it might help. But with the kind of remains that were found in this case, you know, which were pretty seriously decomposed remains. Even though there were some kids who had been killed the same summer that the bodies were found, most of these kids had been dead for as long as two three years and they were only bones. So knows as a forensic anthropologist, you know, when she finds these boxes of bones, it's part of this greater work that she's tried to take on of, you know, looking at this backlog of unsolved dead people. But when she sees those boxes, she has a lot of hope that she can apply tools that weren't available in the seventies to help solve these cases. And that turns out to be true.

Well, so it's in the early two thousands when she gets this job at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office, and she's thrilled because she has just become a forensic anthropologist, and she's really she knows that the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office has this backlog of three hundred to four hundred unidentified people. She knows about that because she's been in Harris County working with the health department doing analysis of murderers and deaths of young children and trying to do preventive work. And then she talks the me who she knows from other work into trying to assign her as an anthropologist, and somebody is working to develop more of us secialten forensic anthropology to work on those cases, because she knows that A, there are murders that are not being solved because of all that backlog of unidentified. B that there are families out there who still need answers. And see, she knows that the technology has evolved, you know, and that so that so many of these cases are from the seventies, the eighties, the nineties when DNA wasn't available, and so since you know, the late eighties, early nineties, DNA becomes a tool for identifications. Of the seventies, the main tools they had really were teeth, you know, dental work. Did the kids go to a dentist or not. If they didn't, boy, it could be really hard for them to be identified. If they broke a bone, an next ray it might help. But with the kind of remains that were found in this case, you know, which were pretty seriously decomposed remains. Even though there were some kids who had been killed the same summer that the bodies were found, most of these kids had been dead for as long as two three years and they were only bones. So knows as a forensic anthropologist, you know, when she finds these boxes of bones, it's part of this greater work that she's tried to take on of, you know, looking at this backlog of unsolved dead people. But when she sees those boxes, she has a lot of hope that she can apply tools that weren't available in the seventies to help solve these cases. And that turns out to be true.

That's incredible, And you know, I told you at the beginning of this I'm so fascinated with forensic anthropology. For one of my first shows, I went to the what I hate the phrase, the body farm, you know, at Texas State University and met with the head of the program there, Daniel.

That's incredible, And you know, I told you at the beginning of this I'm so fascinated with forensic anthropology. For one of my first shows, I went to the what I hate the phrase, the body farm, you know, at Texas State University and met with the head of the program there, Daniel.

He's an incredible guy.

He's an incredible guy.

Yeah, I mean, he's so kind and you know, it was not easy walking around in the field. He took me out into the field to show, you know, where the bodies go and the kind of research they do. And I think when I was out there, they were maybe building a mock house and setting it on fire for the FBI or somebody to kind of show the way that you know, bodies burn so that they can solve cases. I asked Daniel to please give me the boundaries between when does the work of a medical examiner pathologist end and when does the work of an anthropologist begin. How do you know who to call in for what case?

Yeah, I mean, he's so kind and you know, it was not easy walking around in the field. He took me out into the field to show, you know, where the bodies go and the kind of research they do. And I think when I was out there, they were maybe building a mock house and setting it on fire for the FBI or somebody to kind of show the way that you know, bodies burn so that they can solve cases. I asked Daniel to please give me the boundaries between when does the work of a medical examiner pathologist end and when does the work of an anthropologist begin. How do you know who to call in for what case?

Is it?

Is it?

Once they're at the bone level that that's where you would bring in an anthropologist.

Once they're at the bone level that that's where you would bring in an anthropologist.

That's a good question. I mean, pathologists do the autopsies. They're the physicians, and they you know, do the plected, did the data, you know, they analyzed the work ins, They order the tests of say, you know, to see if someone is had consumed drugs or not, you know, and they make the determination of manner and cause of death. You know, was this a murder victim, was this an accidental death, Was this a natural death? Or was this unknown? You know, they do that their work often contributes to identifications. Always in the bigger cities, there were people called investigators who were sort of more like detectives. And my book has a really, i think an interesting story of a young woman who started out as a secretary because that was what they used to hire women as in the seventies, but who was an aspiring investigator and becomes eventually the chief investigator, who helped dig up clues on these cases, who helped try to find the dental records. And at the time, even in the seventies, the Harris County office had at guiding Joe j. Hempstek, who was a really kind of famous medical examiner and the time, who was pretty cutting edge because he had a forensic dentist helping him, who was doing sort of what you think of anthropologists doing today, looking at the tee, looking at bones. They were doing some of that. So flash forward and you're right, there's this movement among anthropologists who start who are initially who are studying bones from prehistory and history in the Smithsonian other places, and the FBI starts to ask them to consult in these more difficult cases involving bones bones only because pathologists have trouble with those cases that often those are considered, you know, just impossible to solve, and these forensic anthropologists develop out of the bigger group of anthropologists, and they start to develop, like you said, the research at places like the original body Farm, which is in Tennessee, and then places like the Body Ranch which you're describing in San Marcos, Texas and other places where they collect a lot of data on how people decompose, how body. They study things. These forensic anthropologists study things like the rate of decomposition in different situations, like if they're in a burning house, or if they're in a car buried or not buried, what predators might do, so that they collect scientific data on decomposition on bones that allows for identifications, allows for clues to be gained from the analysis of bodies that mees, especially in the seventies, would never have been able to gather on their own, you know. Like for example, Sharon figures out fairly quickly on in her research on the first case, which involves the boy, turns out to be Randy Harvey, who I call in the first part of the book the boy with the boots because he had a set of boots that were very seventies and she bailed bell bottomed jeans. And she realizes that in looking at the databases she has from all this research and after doing her own examination of these bones, that this boy was probably a lot younger than they thought in the seventies. That he was simply a kid who at age fifteen had already gotten pretty tall, was about six feet, but he clearly had other characteristics in his bones that she could tell and in his teeth that he was likely a younger teen. And so when they did the analysis on his bones in the seventies, they might not have considered Randy, who was a missing person, as a possible match for that set of remains because they presumed he was older than he was based on his size. So that's an example. But you know, there's a lot of other data that forensic anthropologists can use to kind of solve these cases that is really amazing, And I try to go through a lot of that technology without being too you know, in the weeds in the book, but to try to give you some ideas about how they could use a lot of different amazing tools to figure out who people are based on their bodies or their bones. So one of the things that becomes an important clue for Sharon is I think really interesting to me is that we think of race as you know something, you check a box. Forensic anthropologists see race as a kind of a continuum, and it's more based on ethnicity. So one of the clues that I think becomes important in one of these cases I think is really interesting is she looks at the characteristics of the teeth of two of the boys, and it's a combination of teeth that more frequently occurs in people who have some Native American heritage and maybe some wow European heritage mixed, which of course is not incommon in the United States. But there were just two boys in the group of you know, thirty who had that same combination of teeth, and that was one of the factors that allowed her to start to develop a hypothesis that really came from a kind of a citizen tipster, a journalist who had looked at some of these cases, who said, you know, one of these boys might be misidentified. She started to think that that might be true because she noticed that this boy's teeth were similar to another boy, and that they could actually be brothers, and that there were two sets of brothers that were murdered, but one of the sets of brothers did seem like they were the right brothers the other set. When she looked at them, she could tell from the combination of teeth and what's known now about ethnicity, you know, characteristics, that the two brothers, the second set of brothers were probably not correctly identified, that in fact, the second brother was probably yet another unidentified corpse, and she corrects that mistake by using teeth. Wow. Yeah, So there's a lot of different things can be factors in forensic anthropology research, and you know, they relate to a lot of times to the kinds of research that are done at places like the body ranch that you described in San Marcus, because that they're not just doing research for fun. You know, they're trying to figure out things that can help people solve cases or like you said, identify immigrants. Yeah, and she goes through some of the pitfalls and some of that. You know, some of that research is very tricky, but it can help rule out people too as much as it can help find the right match.