Monday, Mar 14, 2022 • 48min
INFAMOUS: Juan Rivera
Play Episode
the summer of 1992, the brutal rape and murder of 11-year-old Holly Staker shakes the community of Waukegan, IL to its core. When Juan Rivera confesses to the crime, it seems like Holly’s family and members of the public might be able to breathe a sigh of relief. But that’s only the beginning of a case that would haunt the Illinois justice system for years.
Read more
Talking about
Speakers
(2)
Ashley Flowers
Brit Prawat
Transcript
Verified
Break
Ashley Flowers
01:02
And the story I have for you today is well, honestly it's simply tragic and infuriating from start to finish, it's a case that spans decades and although there is just one
Murder
, this is a case that absolutely has multiple victims. This is the story of Juan Rivera and the Murder
of Holly Staker.Share
01:54
On August 17, 1992, Dawn Engelbrecht is working the evening shift at a local tavern in
Waukegan
Illinois
. It's a typical Monday night probably a little slow but just after eight p. m. Dawn sees something totally strange and unexpected. Her five year old son Blake. He's been brought there by one of Dawn's neighbors who says that she found him outside locked out of their apartment.Share
02:19
And Dawn is totally confused at this point. See, earlier that evening she had left both Blake and her two year old daughter Taylor with the babysitter for the night. This eleven year old girl named Holly Staker. So, if Blake is here with her neighbor.
Share
Brit Prawat
02:34
Then where's Holly?
Share
Ashley Flowers
02:36
Exactly. That's probably one of the many questions running through her mind like where in the heck is the babies that I am pegging to look after my kids? And if my five year old is here then what about my two year old?
Share
Brit Prawat
02:48
Right.
Share
Ashley Flowers
02:48
So, right away she calls the house to try and get ahold of Holly and find out what the heck is going on. But the phone rings and rings and rings and there's no answer. At this point, that rage or frustration is probably turning into worry and panic because this isn't the first time Holly has babysat for her, so it's really unlike her to just bail on these two kids.
Share
03:09
Her heart is pounding as she tries to phone again and again and there's still nothing. So, finally she decides to call Holly's mom to let her know what's going on. And the two of them decided to meet at Dawn's apartment, They arrive at around 8:30 p. m. and enter the apartment together, and it's almost completely dark inside. There's just this flickering light coming from a television set that's been left on. But it's enough to see that several pieces of furniture have been overturned.
Share
03:39
Panic immediately sets in and these two moms start moving through the apartment, desperate to find their children. Before long, Dawn finds her daughter Taylor in one of the bedrooms completely unharmed and this wave of relief washes over her. But again, there's still that question, where is Holly. Nancy is still frantically searching the place, going from room to room to room, screaming Holly's name, but there's no answer.
Share
04:05
So, at that point, they quickly contact police who arrived within a few minutes. At this point, everyone is gathered in the kitchen with the police trying to calm Nancy down.
Share
04:15
I mean, she thinks Holly's been kidnapped, but polices first thought is maybe she ran away. But then as they're talking, something occurs to Dawn, what if in her panic to find Taylor and amidst all the chaos of the moment, she overlooked something? Maybe there's still an explanation for this.
Share
Brit Prawat
04:31
Yeah, I mean, that's honestly totally understandable. Especially if you know her sole focus is finding Taylor. Like, I mean, I don't know if I could even pay attention to anything else if I was looking for one of my kids.
Share
Ashley Flowers
04:42
Yeah. And that's what Dawn's thinking. So, she kind of slips out of the kitchen and down the hallway into Taylor and Blake's room this time, more aware of her surroundings. The first time she searched that room, all she felt was relief and joy finding her daughter alive and well. But this time, that feeling is replaced by something else entirely. Just dread because when she pulls back the bedroom door she cannot believe she missed it. It's Holly.
Share
Brit Prawat
05:08
What like Holly hiding?
Share
Ashley Flowers
05:11
No, Holly is curled up in a fetal position on the floor and when Dawn reaches down to touch her, the first thing she notices is how cold Holly's skin is.
Share
05:21
What Dawn doesn't notice is that her son Blake has actually followed her into the bedroom, and before she can even stop him, he walks back into the kitchen and says to the cops and to Nancy, "She's dead, Holly's dead." And just like that, this
Waukegan
home is now officially a Crime Scene
. According to reporting by Andrew Martin and Karen Brandon in the Chicago Tribune
. The investigators get to work immediately processing the scene and they definitely see signs of a struggle between Holly and her attacker.Share
05:52
Like I said earlier, there was overturned furniture in the home, but they also discover that the back door to the apartment appears damaged like it was forced open. On top of that, investigators uncover a lot of physical evidence at the scene. They collect seventy-four fingerprints as well as samples of blood, semen, tissue and hair. And they even find a
Kitchen Knife
in the yard which they believe was used to Murder
Holly.Share
06:18
The autopsy turns up even more evidence of how horrible this crime really was. The pathologist finds that in total Holly had been
Stabbed
twenty-seven times with wounds to her heart, stomach, liver and lungs. There's also hemorrhaging around her neck which the coroner says is a sign that she was forcibly held down or possibly Strangled
and she has defensive wounds on her hands and on her arms. And the pathologist also finds evidence of sexual assault.Share
Brit Prawat
06:46
Okay, so two questions immediately jumped to my mind. Holly was
Stabbed
twenty-seven times. Wouldn't that leave massive amounts of blood in the apartment? Like did Dawn and Nancy not see any of that when they first arrived?Share
Ashley Flowers
06:59
So, that's exactly what I wondered. But the
Crime Scene
is never really described as being covered in blood or anything like that. I mean there's one description of the scene where it says that there was blood in the bedroom where Holly was found as well as some near the kitchen sink.Share
07:14
Like, someone had maybe washed bloody hands and there are a couple of like bloody streaks on a staircase banister. So, my assumption is that Dawn and Nancy simply overlooked it. Like, it again it wasn't this like completely horrific
Crime Scene
.Share
Brit Prawat
07:29
Well, and also they had this tunnel vision of finding their kids.
Share
Ashley Flowers
07:32
Right. And remember it was super dark when they first arrived, and there's a lot of panic, there's a lot of chaos. So, again I I think that they could actually overlook it.
Share
Brit Prawat
07:40
Okay, so my second question is, I mean, you said this is taking place in what 1992? Is there any hope at all that all these samples investigators have can be tested for
DNA?
Share
Ashley Flowers
07:51
Yes, so
DNA
profiling is still in its infancy at this point. But police would definitely have that in their toolbox. And listen with all the physical evidence that they're finding, investigators definitely feel like this is going to be a really simple case to close. Which is good because as you can imagine, the community is reeling over this crime. So, in the first week after Holly's Murder
, police are working around the clock. They follow up on one hundred fifty-five leads and log seventeen hundred hours on this case.Share
08:20
They actually even set up a roadblock at one point stopping motorists in the area and just straight up asking for any information or tips that they have. They also questioned a number of men in the area but there's still no one that they would consider a prime suspect.
Share
Brit Prawat
08:33
Okay, what do you mean? Like, are these men that were close to Holly or the family? She was babysitting?
Share
Ashley Flowers
08:39
Police don't elaborate on who exactly they are. I'm assuming that maybe these are people in the area who have criminal records, maybe a known history of violence. That sort of thing. But it doesn't really matter because regardless it doesn't get them anywhere.
Share
Brit Prawat
08:52
So, what about all that physical evidence they found? Did that not turn up anything?
Share
Ashley Flowers
08:57
Well not yet. So, investigators are still waiting for the results to come back. And as the days turned into weeks tension in the community continues to mount. The school year is starting. So, parents are watching their kids like walk out the door every single morning all the while remembering that Holly's killer, someone who was capable of sexually assaulting an eleven year old girl and
Stabbing
her twenty-seven times is still out there, still walking the streets among everyone else.Share
09:23
Then, in early October, nearly two months after Holly's
Murder
, someone finally comes forward to say that they have information about Holly's killer or rather they know someone who has the information.Share
09:35
This tip comes from a guy who is being held at the County Jail and he says that his former cell mate, a guy named Juan Rivera boasted to him that he knew who killed Holly. Lucky for police Juan is pretty easy to track down because he's just a few hours away at Hill Correctional Facility in
Galesburg
serving a three year sentence for burglary.Share
09:55
So, police head there to talk to Juan, and find out what he knows. In that initial meeting, police are convinced that Juan actually could have the information they need. So, they transfer him back to the County Jail for more thorough questioning. According to Andrew Martin's reporting for the
Chicago Tribune
as police press Juan for details about what he knows.Share
10:15
He admits that on the night Holly was murdered, he knew where she was babysitting and police are kind of thrown for a loop. So, they asked him how he would know this, and police say that Juan's response to that question was that he quote, unquote, "Just slipped."
Share
Brit Prawat
10:32
Just slipped? What does that even mean?
Share
Ashley Flowers
10:35
Well, I think investigators interpreted as Juan admitting that he just made a mistake by saying that like he slipped up by letting them know. And at this point they started thinking want isn't just a source, he's actually probably a suspect.
Share
10:51
So, they're no longer casually asking him for any information he has, there straight up interrogating him. And it's during this interrogation that police say Juan's story really falls apart. At first he offers an alibi and says that he was at a house party on the night of Holly's
Murder
. But police look into that and discovered that there was no party at this house on that night.Share
11:14
So, next he says that he was actually riding around the neighborhood on his bicycle that night, and that he broke into a car and stole some speakers. But again, police look into that and there's no report of any car break ins that night. They keep pushing. And finally, after four long days of questioning it's over. Juan Rivera signs a confession admitting to the sexual assault and
Murder
of Holly Staker.Share
11:39
So, on October 30th. After ten weeks of investigation and more than five hundred leads, police arrest Juan and charged him with two counts of first degree
Murder
. But here's the thing that confession and arrest that is not the end of this story. Not by a long shot.Share
Break
Ashley Flowers
13:23
After Juan's arrest, The state attorney holds a news conference and details how the
Murder
unfolded. He said that Juan just happened to be in the neighborhood where Holly was babysitting and saw her while he was outside. Apparently Juan spent a lot of time in that neighborhood and actually knew Holly and not like friends. Really more like acquaintances.Share
Brit Prawat
13:43
Okay, can you clarify something for me real quick? So, how old is Juan at this point?
Share
Ashley Flowers
13:48
So he's twenty years old at the time of his arrest, which I think what you're pointing out is that sticks out to me as well, like what business as atwenty year old man having being acquainted with an eleven year old girl?
Share
Brit Prawat
13:58
Yeah.
Share
Ashley Flowers
13:59
But, apparently lots of people in the neighborhood were familiar with Holly as well as her sister Heather because they were twins. So, Juan like many others would have at least known of them. Now, ultimately, the state's attorney says that sexual assault was the motive in this case. And then he gives this like creepy statement like the attorney himself does.
Share
14:19
That goes so far as to describe Holly and Heather as quote, "Attractive young ladies", which I don't know how anyone can think that's like an appropriate way to describe two eleven year old children.
Share
Brit Prawat
14:31
And just to clarify, this is the State's Attorney calling them attractive. Not Juan right?
Share
Ashley Flowers
14:36
Yeah, Yeah. The attorney.
Share
Brit Prawat
14:38
Okay. So I just like to confirm the'90s were pretty gross.
Share
Ashley Flowers
14:41
Yeah. I mean to me it's a little dumbfounding. Anyway, he goes on to say that Juan and Holly spoke briefly and then the two went into the apartment and that's when the sexual assault happened. He thinks that the
Murder
itself was unplanned that he Stabbed
Holly with a knife that he found in the kitchen, basically. So she couldn't tell anyone about the sexual assault.Share
Brit Prawat
14:59
And did Juan have any history of sexual offenses or violence prior to this?
Share
Ashley Flowers
15:04
No, nothing like this. Andrew Martin and John Gorman say in the
Chicago Tribune
that earlier in that year, Rivera had been convicted on a burglary charge and sentenced to thirty months probation. And then in July he was arrested again for a similar crime when he was eventually sentenced to a three year term, which again, we already know that he was serving for when police questioned him.Share
Brit Prawat
15:23
Okay. But if he was arrested in July and Holly was murdered on August 17th, can you explain to me how that works?
Share
Ashley Flowers
15:30
Well, so he wasn't actually in jail that whole time. His probation officer at the time had recommended Juan be placed under house arrest, but this does lead to the first significant kind of wrinkle in the case. You see as part of the house arrest program, Juan was required to wear an Ankle Monitor that ensured he always stayed within a hundred feet of his home.
Share
Brit Prawat
15:53
So, police would know right away if this guy left his house to you know, I don't know commit a horrific
Murder
?Share
Ashley Flowers
15:60
We would think especially since the house where Holly was babysitting at was over two miles away. But here's the thing. These monitors were notoriously easy to tamper with from what I understand. There are like two devices, the monitor itself, which would be worn by the person under house arrest, and then the dialer which is what notifies authorities. If you leave that established perimeter.
Share
Brit Prawat
16:22
Right? The dialer would be like the like homing device. That's where you have to be.
Share
Ashley Flowers
16:27
Right. But you can unplug the dialer, and I guess it won't notify authorities until either six hours have passed or the dialer is plugged back in.
Share
Speaker 1
16:39
Are we allowed to give an award for the most ineffective monitoring system?
Share
Ashley Flowers
16:43
Right? Now, apparently even the company that manufactured these monitors recommended that they not be used and then stopped making this model in 1989.
Share
Brit Prawat
16:53
And the police just didn't get the memo or what?
Share
Ashley Flowers
16:57
Well, in their reporting for the
Chicago Tribune
Jerry Thomas and Andrew Martin imply that it was probably a cost decision that kept the county from upgrading their system. Like, apparently they had purchased the monitors for about forty-five thousand dollars in 1986. And then to replace them with new ones would have cost another like forty thousand dollars.Share
Brit Prawat
17:16
So, just because they didn't want to drop another 40K. Juan and honestly who knows who else could theoretically just leave their house, and the police would have no way of knowing?
Share
Ashley Flowers
17:28
Well, not even just theoretically. Juan had left his house before on at least one occasion July 27th. And police knew about that one. Because again it's not that the person wearing advice could leave and no one would notice the alarm would trigger either six hours later or whenever the dialer was plugged back in. Whichever came first.
Share
Brit Prawat
17:46
So, do police have any record of him leaving on the night that Holly was killed?
Share
Ashley Flowers
17:50
Well, it depends on who you ask. Juan's attorney says no, he is adamant that the computer logs show that Juan was home that evening, all evening that the device was working properly and that there were no attempts to tamper with the monitor. But the state's attorney says that the device was removed on August 17th in time for Juan to commit Holly's
Murder
.Share
Brit Prawat
18:12
Okay. How can there be any uncertainty though? Either there is a record of the monitor being removed or tampered with? Or there isn't. I mean it seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Share
Ashley Flowers
18:22
Well, that's the attorneys point. Police are saying that they have information showing the device was removed on the night of Holly's
Murder
. But they don't actually follow up and provide any actual record of it. The only thing they officially document is that on August 18th the day after Holly's Murder
. The strap on Juan's monitor was found to be loose and then was replaced on August 19th. But again to me that's not the same as a record showing that he actually left his house.Share
Brit Prawat
18:48
Right? And the strap could be loose for a number of reasons. Okay, so setting all of that aside. There was all that physical evidence like you said there were fingerprints, blood tissue, hair, even semen found at the scene. And now that they have their guy, I assume they must have matched at least some of those samples to Juan. Right?
Share
Ashley Flowers
19:08
Well, it's all still pending which like I get the
DNA
stuff. This is you know at the time. New tech. But what I can't totally wrap my head around is why comparing prints would be so delayed. All I do know is that authorities say in mid November that they've completed and analyzed some of the physical evidence but they won't confirm if any of it is a match to Juan. And at this Juan's trial is drawing closer. On November 18, 1992. He officially enters a plea of not guilty.Share
Brit Prawat
19:37
But he did confess, right?
Share
Ashley Flowers
19:40
Well he did. But his attorney and families say that those incriminating statements were coerced and that he didn't understand the significance of the confession he signed and listen, I mean, you and I and every
Crime Junkie
listening knows that a signed confession isn't always what they're cracked up to be.Share
19:57
But from the prosecution's perspective, that confession is all they need. And they're moving forward with the case regardless of whether or not the
DNA
test results come in And on December 31st, they announced that they will be seeking the death penalty against Juan, which they say they decided based on Holly's young age and the brutality of the crime.Share
20:17
But that assumes that they even get to trial. See? It was originally set to begin on January 25th, 1993. But then as that date draws closer, the prosecution and the defense both asked for a delay.
Share
Brit Prawat
20:31
Are they both just not ready?
Share
Ashley Flowers
20:34
Well, yeah, because they're still waiting for the
DNA
results from their lap almost three months after Juan's arrest. And listen at this point, it's becoming kind of clear that this isn't even a case of like, oh that's just how things were back then. Like this judge is just as infuriated in 1993 as we are here in 2022. According to Robert and status reporting in the Chicago Tribune
. He literally refers to the lab and says quote, "Don't these people realize there is some urgency?" end quote.Share
Brit Prawat
21:01
I'm sorry, put that on a T-shirt for me.
Share
Ashley Flowers
21:05
Yeah. But apparently not because the prosecution says the test results could be another thirty days. So, the trial is delayed. And it's delayed again when the defense tries to have Juan's confession thrown out because they say it was coerced.
Share
21:20
Now of course, the investigators say that the whole thing was above board, no funny business, just good old fashioned police work. They say that he was treated well, read his Miranda rights provided with food and drink and in his own testimony, Juan even backs up some of these details. But overall, the defense still says that the confession itself doesn't hold up to scrutiny because they say that it was signed after four straight days of intense police interrogation.
Share
21:45
And by intense police investigation. I mean, intense enough to cause want to have a complete mental breakdown. At one point he was found slamming his head against a cell wall so violently that he had to be restrained.
Share
Brit Prawat
21:58
Oh my God!
Share
Ashley Flowers
21:59
This episode occurred just hours before the actual confession, and he was given two different drugs to address anxiety and psychosis. His legs and arms were restrained so he wouldn't hurt himself. And he's described as laying on the floor of his cell in this nearly comatose state, like eyes wide open and just a blank stare on his face.
Share
Brit Prawat
22:20
Okay yeah, I can totally see why the defense would be trying to get that thrown out, but there's something that's been bugging me about this whole thing. Like it's not like this interrogation and confession all took place like in the wild west of the 1800's or something, is there no recording of any of this?
Share
Ashley Flowers
22:36
There isn't and that's something Juan's attorney brings up too. Like if Juan was so cooperative then why would he have refused to allow his confession to be recorded? Which is what investigators have been alleging this whole time. Like it was Juan's decision that they didn't have anything on tape. So, literally the only document they have is a typed confession written out by one of the detectives and signed by Juan.
Share
22:57
Now around this same time that all this is happening, there's yet another twist in the case. And this one comes up when Juan's defense team alleges that they know of someone else who may be responsible for the death of Holly Staker. Andrew Martin and James Hill reported for the
Chicago Tribune
that according to court documents filed by Juan's defense team, police received a tip early in their investigation from an informant that a Waukegan
gang member had been bragging to his friends that he had killed Holly.Share
Brit Prawat
23:30
And I'm assuming this is a different informant than the one that pointed police towards Juan?
Share
Ashley Flowers
23:34
Correct. This informant is only referred to as John Doe, and the man he alleges committed the
Murder
is never named but according to the court documents, John Doe told police that on the evening of Holly's Murder
. He and his unnamed man, the Juan who he says killed Holly were at a party.Share
23:50
The unnamed man was using
LSD
and eventually left the party for a time and then returned wearing different clothes. And then several days later at another gathering, he started bragging about having committed the Murder
. On top of that Juan's attorney claims that this unnamed man told several other people about committing the crime who also reached out to law enforcement.Share
Brit Prawat
24:12
Okay, So, did the police follow up on this?
Share
Ashley Flowers
24:15
Yeah. They say they checked out plenty of other people, including this
LSD
party guy and they concluded that none of them were involved. Police are confident Juan Rivera is their guy, and not just because he confessed to the crime, but because they now have evidence physical evidence, they say that definitively links Juan to Holly's Murder
.Share
Break
Ashley Flowers
26:05
Apparently police got their hands on a shoe that Juan was wearing the night of the crime and on that shoe they found traces of Holly's blood.
Share
Brit Prawat
26:16
I mean, I guess who needs a confession when you have Holly's
DNA
on a suspect's clothing?Share
Ashley Flowers
26:22
Yet, it's not Holly's
DNA
exactly though. The sample found on the shoe apparently wasn't large enough for technicians to say that at a hundred percent was her blood. But they tell the media that they're testing, narrowed it down to a tiny segment of the population and that segment would have included Holly.Share
Brit Prawat
26:40
Okay. That is definitely not the same thing though. Like how tiny are we talking?
Share
Ashley Flowers
26:46
Okay, here's the thing, Juan's attorney says that this tiny segment of the population could include Holly. Yes. Along with fifty million other Americans, literally twenty percent of the U. S population at the time.
Share
Brit Prawat
27:00
Okay. So, how did they get from? We found Holly's
DNA
on your shoe to we found DNA
on your shoe and we're confident that it's Holly's, even though it could be literally fifty million other people.Share
Ashley Flowers
27:12
Your guess is as good as mine. And honestly this is almost the least sketchy part of this because at this point it's not even clear that the shoe that they had, one that they tested even belonged to Juan.
Share
Brit Prawat
27:23
Wait, what?
Share
Ashley Flowers
27:25
Yes. So, it isn't a shoe that they found like at his house. According to more of Andrew Martin's reporting for the
Chicago Tribune
. They got it three months after the Murder
from another inmate who said that he had gotten the shoes from Juan in a trade like while they were both in prison together.Share
27:45
Yeah. He says that apparently he gave Juan a television in exchange for the shoes which I kind of have a hard time imagining inmates just like walking around with their own personal televisions, and I know they have television sets in prison.
Share
27:58
But like I guess I always thought you were like issued like standard clothes to wear a standard shoes to wear. And it seems like Juan's just like, oh yeah, I brought these from like back when I was out of prison. I'll trade it just doesn't sit right with me, right? But that's how he says that the shoes came into his possession.
Share
Brit Prawat
28:13
Yeah, the whole thing feels kind of sketch. But does this mean the only thing tying Juan to the
Murder
is his maybe not super aboveboard confession?Share
Ashley Flowers
28:22
Pretty much, but luckily for police and the prosecution, despite all the claims that the interrogation was coercive and abusive despite Juan claiming to not even remember signing it. The judge rules that it can be used in the case. The other piece of their case is testimony from Dawn Engelbrecht, the woman whose children Holly was babysitting when she was murdered. She claims that she saw Juan near the scene of the crime that night, and that he had asked her what had happened.
Share
Brit Prawat
28:52
Which is supposed to prove what exactly that he was nosing around after the fact?
Share
Ashley Flowers
28:58
Well, I think the prosecution sees it as proof that Juan had left his house that night regardless of what the monitoring system records indicate. But it doesn't even matter because before the trial even begins.
Share
29:08
Dawn ends up recanting saying that she can't say for certain if Juan was the person that she saw at the scene of the crime. And so now they no longer even have that. By this time the judges so frustrated by all the delays and the mud slinging back and forth between the defense and prosecution. That he's like, you know what I'm out. And he actually becomes the fourth judge to be removed from the case.
Share
Brit Prawat
29:30
Wait the fourth?
Share
Ashley Flowers
29:32
Yeah. So there were others that were removed early on, mostly for like technical reasons like conflict of interest. But thankfully the fifth time is the charm because finally in November of 1993, more than a year after Juan was charged, his trial actually begins.
Share
29:49
Naturally, a lot of the trial focuses on what happened when Juan was brought in for questioning. The prosecution hammers home the fact that Juan lied to investigators early in questioning when he provided alibis that were provably false. And then of course there's the confession itself and although there's plenty of room to argue whether or not it's on the up and up it is still a confession.
Share
Brit Prawat
30:11
So, I did Juan mention anything in that confession that only the killer would have known?
Share
Ashley Flowers
30:16
Well, yeah, so kind of yes, according to investigators want provided details that they say hadn't been made public at the time that he confessed for instance, he had told them that he damaged the back door with a mop handle in an effort to make it look like someone had broke in.
Share
30:32
And then he also says that he
Stabbed
Holly using a knife that he found in the kitchen which he says broke in two. And then he tossed in the yard. And those details are consistent with what investigators discovered at the scene.Share
Brit Prawat
30:44
Okay. But we already knew those things like the forced entry, the knife in the yard.
Share
Ashley Flowers
30:49
We knew like the broad strokes like police said publicly that they had found a Kitchen Knife in the yard which they believed to be the
Murder
weapon. But what they hadn't said was the fact that it was broken in to pieces. But here's the thing without a full recording of the interrogation and confession. I can't help but wonder if investigators maybe led him to those details. Like those details slip because it's not like Juan provided any new information.Share
31:13
Like police don't say that Juan provided them with any information they didn't already know just that they had these details that the public didn't know.
Share
Brit Prawat
31:22
Right. So, he could have been asked leading questions or something.
Share
Ashley Flowers
31:26
Exactly. And it is important to note here that Juan's I. Q. was below average at just seventy-nine which may have made him more susceptible to that kind of interrogation. Again, we just don't know. So, after poking these holes in the confession, the defense has Juan's family testified that he was at home with them on the night of Holly's
Murder
.Share
31:47
And then, they finally addressed the thing we've all been waiting for. The physical evidence, and it turns out all of the evidence, the blood, the hair, the fingerprints. The semen was not a match for Juan Rivera.
Share
Brit Prawat
32:02
Oh my God, like how is that? Not just an immediate dealbreaker?
Share
Ashley Flowers
32:07
Right? But the prosecution argues that technically Juan could have killed Holly without leaving any blood and semen at the scene. And so just because he doesn't match the evidence found, that doesn't mean that he didn't commit the
Murder
.Share
Brit Prawat
32:22
Okay. But if he didn't leave, the semen don't know, found inside an eleven year old child, who did?
Share
Ashley Flowers
32:28
My thoughts exactly. And Karen Brandon and Andrew Martin's coverage of the trial for the
Chicago Tribune
. They say that the prosecution argued that the semen technically could have been there for days before the Murder
and I just, I genuinely don't know what prosecutors are thinking at this point, like either someone else entirely sexually assaulted and murdered this little girl, or at the very least someone else committed statutory rape and it's almost like they're just shrugging it off.Share
Brit Prawat
32:57
Yeah, I like to be honest, I'm I'm almost speechless but to summarize there's no physical evidence linking Juan Rivera to Holly's sexual assault and
Murder
? There are no witnesses who can say for sure that they saw him at the scene? There's an ankle monitoring system that has no record of him leaving the house?Share
Ashley Flowers
33:15
Correct. But they have that confession and it turns out to be enough because after nine hours of deliberation over two days, the jury returns with a verdict of guilty and although the jury ultimately decides against the death penalty, Juan is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. But the sense of relief and justice that Holly's loved ones feel doesn't last forever, doesn't even last three years because in November of 1996, the court reverses Juan's conviction.
Share
Brit Prawat
33:51
Why?
Share
Ashley Flowers
33:52
Dennis O'Brien and Andrew Martin say in the
Chicago Tribune
that the ruling is based on four technical air's made by the judge during trial, mostly around allowing the admission of some hearsay evidence, and limiting the defense's opening statements.Share
34:08
These things are minor enough on their own that like it wouldn't have been considered grounds for a retrial. But together they're problematic enough to lead to a second trial. And I have to imagine that Juan's defense team is thinking that this could be a real opportunity for them. Because even if there's no new evidence, four years have passed since this shocking crime. So, maybe that pressure to just punish someone isn't as strong now, maybe it will lead a jury to consider the actual evidence or lack of evidence.
Share
34:37
Juan second trial begins in September of 1998, a little under five years after the original verdict was returned. And it ends up being quite similar to the first trial. However, the prosecution does introduce two new witnesses, One of whom says that she not only saw Juan Rivera at the
Crime Scene
but actually saw him Murder
Holly. Blake and Taylor the two children, Holly was babysitting the night of her Murder
.Share
35:03
Are the witnesses, Blake says that he saw Juan outside their apartment not long after Holly's body was discovered. But it's Taylor's testimony that is truly mind boggling because she says that she remembers Juan picking her up and placing her on the bed where she would later be found by her mother Dawn.
Share
Brit Prawat
35:23
Okay Ashley, you know, I have a weirdly, weirdly vivid memory. And I can remember things from when I was pretty little. But even my earliest memory is like from when I was like maybe four or five Taylor was what, two?
Share
Ashley Flowers
35:40
Two.
Share
Brit Prawat
35:41
How is that even possible?
Share
Ashley Flowers
35:42
Exactly, I can't even tell you and at this point it's been six years since it's happened. So, it's not even like she's three and trying to say this or four and trying to say this like it's hard to imagine taking this testimony terribly seriously. Which Juan's defense attorney points out when they got her to admit that she had previously said Holly's killer. May have been a black man, which Juan is not, but apart from this absolutely bonkers development, the second trial covers a lot of the same ground.
Share
36:11
The prosecution focuses heavily on the signed confession and the defense team tries to discredit that confession, and again reiterates that there is still no physical evidence tying, Juan to Holly's
Murder
, nothing. And this time the case does seem to sit a little differently with the jury because they deliberate much longer this time for almost thirty-six hours, and the lack of physical evidence is absolutely something that they struggle with this time around.Share
36:36
But again they feel like it's hard to argue with a confession. And ultimately they come to the same conclusion that Juan is guilty, and so once again he is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. It's welcome news for Holly's family who is still dealing with the pain of not having her around, not seeing her grow up alongside her twin sister Heather.
Share
37:01
But the second guilty verdict probably seems like I don't know proof that the person responsible for Holly's death is sitting behind bars where he belongs? And where he'll be for the rest of his life. That is until March of 2004, when Juan is given yet another chance to clear his name.
Share
Break
Ashley Flowers
39:48
Six years after Juan second conviction, Northwestern University's Center On Wrongful Convictions decides to take up his case, and they're motivated by the same issues that have plagued this case for more than a decade. At this point, the lack of physical evidence, the four days of constant interrogation that led to the confession. Not to mention that one of the key witnesses at that second trial was an actual toddler at the time of the
Murder
.Share
Brit Prawat
40:13
Yeah. Super glad that just didn't get swept under the rug here.
Share
Ashley Flowers
40:16
Same.
Share
Brit Prawat
40:17
But I guess what I'm wondering is why do they think that this time will be any different? I mean, like you said, nothing's changed. There's no physical evidence. But that was also true of the first two trials.
Share
Ashley Flowers
40:28
Well, here's the thing something has changed technology. The science behind
DNA
Testing
at the time of the original trial was so primitive that it required really large sample sizes, whereas in 2004 they can do a lot more with a lot less.Share
40:43
So, all this physical evidence that was collected from the original
Crime Scene
gets tested again. And I mean once again it reveals no connection to Juan and once again, Lake County officials say it doesn't matter. We've already got our guy.Share
Brit Prawat
40:57
I mean, I know I shouldn't be surprised, but here we are.
Share
Ashley Flowers
41:00
You know, I know it's becoming like a very predictable pattern at this point. But the courts aren't quite so confident, and they order a third trial. And of course this time the physical evidence even more definitively rules out Juan Rivera. But the truly infuriating thing is that when the prosecution tries to again explain away the fact that a different man's semen was found inside Holly's body.
Share
41:24
They also make this argument that Holly was the type of girl who might have had sex with a different grown man prior to Juan murdering her. And they based this on the fact that she was apparently molested when she was eight years old and that she had previously masturbated.
Share
Brit Prawat
41:40
Like first of all, there's no such thing as consensual sex with an eleven year old. That is sexual assault, no matter what. Second, what does it matter if she was molested in her past or if she had masturbated? Like-
Share
Ashley Flowers
41:54
So, she's gone through trauma and then you're like again slut shaming her because of that.
Share
Brit Prawat
41:59
I'm as raging as you are.
Share
Ashley Flowers
42:01
Same.
Share
Brit Prawat
42:01
And on top of that like someone, someone's semen was found inside of her. Someone other than the person who has been convicted twice of killing her. Like, even if the person who assaulted her didn't kill her, there's still someone out there who assaulted her that we can't connect to anything.
Share
Ashley Flowers
42:17
And at this point we're talking twelve years after the fact and no one's been looking for that person.
Share
Brit Prawat
42:21
Right. Like how they not entered this
DNA
into a database or something to see if it's a match for someone else?Share
Ashley Flowers
42:27
So, from what I can tell, they actually had the defense actually pushed for this. Not the prosecution of course. And after a Federal Court Order, the
DNA
was entered into both state and federal databases. But there had been no match. So, all of this aside for the third time, the prosecution relies pretty much solely on the confession as a basis of their case. But there is one really interesting update to the physical evidence that I want to mention.Share
42:51
See? Remember how I said that Juan confessed to trying to stage the
Crime Scene
to look like there was forced entry? He apparently said he used a mop handle to kind of like damage the back door of the apartment, which authorities later found when they were processing the scene? Well, according to the Chicago Tribune
. A forensic specialist testified that there was evidence of multiple attempts to force the door open.Share
43:13
We're talking footprints on the door a screwdriver that was used to pry it open. And obviously that doesn't line up with Juan's apparent confession that he saw Holly on the street and followed her into the apartment, and then staged the break in after the
Murder
. Now it's totally possible that those footprints and screwdriver could have been there before the Murder
. But like that would be a pretty big coincidence, right?Share
Brit Prawat
43:36
Oh, Totally.
Share
Ashley Flowers
43:37
But ultimately the Jurors still have a hard time getting their heads around the idea that an innocent man could confess to
Murder
in detail and then sign his name to it. And so for the third time in sixteen years. Juan Rivera is found guilty of the sexual assault and Murder
of Holly Staker and for the third time he is sentenced to life in prison without parole.Share
Brit Prawat
44:02
Holly's poor family were living that trauma just over and over and over again.
Share
Ashley Flowers
44:08
It's heartbreaking and following the sentencing, Holly's mother Nancy read a victim impact statement in which she says quote "Put him away for life and let us live. Let us never have to go through this again." End quote.
Share
Brit Prawat
44:22
I mean I truly do feel for her pain and I can't imagine not only losing your child in such a horrific way but then having to have that wound open over and over again. Like but it's just so hard to feel like justice has actually been served here. I mean especially since we still don't know who left their
DNA
. Inside the body of an eleven year old child.Share
Ashley Flowers
44:44
I agree. My heart breaks so much in this case because you can tell like Holly's family really thinks it's what I really wanted to be Juan. But there are just so many questions.
Share
Brit Prawat
44:53
It's almost like honestly they needed to be Juan, you know?
Share
Ashley Flowers
44:56
But they're just not trying to answer the questions right? Like if you have your guy let's answer all this stuff. Because what's so infuriating is that in a
Chicago Tribune
article filed by Lisa Black and Ruth Fuller. Assistant State's Attorney Michael Normel says, "Prosecutors are not required to prove whose DNA
was found inside Holly". He says, quote "As it turns out for a third time that really does not alter the outcome." End quote.Share
Brit Prawat
45:21
And so I return to someone else sexually assaulted this little girl. But it's okay because you were able to convince a jury to convict someone else.
Share
Ashley Flowers
45:33
I could rage about this for the rest of the episode and I could go on and on for hours but like to take a real quick tangent. This is probably the one thing that makes me like pull my hair out most about the legal system. The true crime community like this to me is so clearly a prosecution looking for a win over everything else. Like, they don't really care who killed her or again if you're gonna say Juan killed her and you are so convinced because you have whatever evidence you think you have fine.
Share
46:02
But again someone else sexually assaulted her. It really feels like they're not looking for that person because that's going to poke holes in Juan's case.
Share
Brit Prawat
46:09
Well, and to bring up something that was brought up earlier, the whole motive for the
Murder
was the sexual assault. Right?Share
Ashley Flowers
46:16
Right. So, I mean unless they're saying like oh he still assaulted her but didn't leave semen. Like is their whole motive gone?
Share
Brit Prawat
46:23
Right.
Share
Ashley Flowers
46:23
Again. I like I, I hate when we should be looking for the truth no matter what, no matter where that points. And again if it is Juan, okay, fine let's find the guy who killed her. But also let's find the other guy who sexually assaulted an eleven year old girl. And clearly the only reason they're not doing that is because it would weaken their case against this other guy. So, we're just gonna let what a guy who's going around having sex with children run free. Like, I feel like I'm losing my mind here.
Share
Brit Prawat
46:50
No, no. And you're right, like I personally could spiral on this for days because I cannot understand the logic of like you said again, if Juan did kill her, we still have someone out there who has assaulted a child. How is that not also worth looking in to?
Share
Ashley Flowers
47:06
I know, to get back to the episode, Juan's legal team is not going down without a fight. They have to be just as infuriated as you and I are. So, they appealed the verdict and in December 2011, the court actually throws out Juan's conviction stating that quote, "No rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." End quote. And finally, we have somebody who's like thinking with their brain.
Share
Brit Prawat
47:34
Rational trier of fact also needs to be on a T-shirt I think. But when you say throws out Juan's conviction, is that like trials three was if he try again or a full, he did not do it, stop saying he did.
Share
Ashley Flowers
47:48
The latter. The court actually bars prosecutors from trying this case again. Now that doesn't mean that the prosecution can't request that that ruling be reconsidered. And at first they say that they're debating what course of action to take, but ultimately they decide not to challenge the decision. And so on January 6th, 2012, Juan Rivera is released from prison. At this point, he's thirty-nine years old and has been incarcerated for almost half his life. But this still isn't the end of the story.
Share
Brit Prawat
48:19
I mean, it can't be, this has suddenly become a twenty year old unsolved
Murder.
Share
Ashley Flowers
48:24
Right. And investigators do start reworking the case. But I actually mean it isn't the end of Juan's story. See? By 2014, Juan has filed a federal case for
Wrongful Conviction
and that case leads to multiple explosive allegations about the original investigation, for example, two years after Holly's Murder
, a man found a bread knife buried in the bushes just steps away from the Crime Scene
. And I assume he knew about the Murder
. It would be hard to live in Waukegan
at the time and not know about it. And that's why he turned the knife over to police.Share
48:58
Now from there you would expect the knife would have been tested for forensic evidence. But not only is there no record of the knife being tested. It turns out that police actually destroyed the knife.
Share
Brit Prawat
49:10
Destroyed it?
Share
Ashley Flowers
49:13
Juan's legal team was never told about it. And it seems like even the state's attorney didn't know about the knife. And what's more a Forensic Expert hired by the defense said that Holly's wounds are actually more consistent with this type of serrated blade than with the straight edge blade originally found at the
Crime Scene
.Share
Brit Prawat
49:30
So, this could have been a crucial piece of evidence?
Share
Ashley Flowers
49:33
Could have been. We'll never know. That's not even the worst part because the
DNA
that was recovered from the Crime Scene
that investigators still haven't matched to a suspect? Well, that DNA
actually showed up at another Crime Scene
almost ten years after Holly's Murder
.Share
Brit Prawat
49:51
What?
Share
Ashley Flowers
49:53
In early 2000, a man named Delwin Foxworth was beaten with a two by four doused in gasoline and set on fire. And when authorities investigating that
Murder,
analyzed the two by four, they found DNA
that matched the semen found in Holly's body.Share
Brit Prawat
50:09
So, was it a match for Delwin Foxworth?
Share
Ashley Flowers
50:12
According to Steven Mills and Dan Hinkle's reporting for the
Chicago Tribune
. Not only was it not a match for Delwin, it wasn't even a match for Marvin Williford. The man convicted of Delwin's Murder
.Share
50:26
So, the source material has no information on where this
DNA
might have come from. I mean it very well could have been someone who handled this two by four randomly. But this is yet another reminder that eight years after Holly's sexual assault and Murder
, whoever this guy is, is still out there. And to me this is also another case where it's just like why aren't we finding who this guy is?Share
50:48
And I have something else that's just going to make your head explode. Remember those sneakers that the prosecution made a big deal about to the press? The ones that had Holly's blood on them supposedly linking Juan to Holly's
Murder
?Share
Brit Prawat
50:59
Yeah.
Share
Ashley Flowers
50:60
Well, it turns out that these shoes weren't even available for purchase in store until after Holly's death.
Share
Brit Prawat
51:07
Hold up. So, the shoe that may or may not have belonged to Juan, may or may not have had Holly's
DNA
on it, maybe didn't even exist when she was killed?Share
Ashley Flowers
51:19
Yeah. And they even tested the
DNA
sample from the shoe again and get this. It actually was a match for Holly's DNA
, but not only Holly's DNA
, the test revealed a second DNA
source and when they tested that DNA
it was a match to the semen found in Holly.Share
Brit Prawat
51:40
That doesn't even make sense though. Like how?
Share
Ashley Flowers
51:44
You're right. It doesn't make sense. But there is at least one explanation. Juan's attorneys in the
Wrongful Conviction
suit are saying the only plausible explanation is that the evidence was planted on the shoes by police.Share
Brit Prawat
51:60
And I'm going to assume the police deny this.
Share
Ashley Flowers
52:02
Well, but that along with pretty much everything else about this case is enough for Juan Rivera to be awarded a twenty million dollar settlement in his
Wrongful Conviction
suit.Share
Brit Prawat
52:13
Woah! Did you say? Twenty million?
Share
Ashley Flowers
52:16
Twenty million. At the time it was the largest
Wrongful Conviction
settlement in U. S history. That's how bad this case was botched. And look thank God he was compensated. But no one deserves to spend nearly twenty years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. But this is anything but a happy ending. Juan can't buy back those years that he lost while in jail.Share
52:37
No matter how much money he has, police can't get back the potential leads they let pass them by. During all those years they wasted convinced they had their guy when they obviously didn't. And most important of all Holly's family cannot get their daughter back. Holly Staker was sexually assaulted and brutally murdered when she was just eleven years old.
Share
52:58
And the person who did that to her has still not been brought to justice. Even though by my accounts we still have evidence to work with and I don't know what's being done now to find that. Even if they still believe they have their guy and they think they're guy got off, there's still another mystery to be solved whose
DNA
was found in Holly staker? And until that is answered I don't think you can answer any of the other questions in this case.Share
53:28
If you have any information that could help investigators finally solve this crime and bring justice to Holly, please contact the Lake County
Crime Stoppers
at 8476622222.Share
53:54
You can find all the source material for this episode on our website crimejunkiepodcast. com.
Share
Brit Prawat
54:01
And be sure to follow us on instagram at
Crime Junkie
podcast.Share
Ashley Flowers
54:04
We'll be back next week with a brand new episode.
Share
Break
Add podcast
🇮🇹 Made with love & passion in Italy. 🌎 Enjoyed everywhere
Build n. 1.38.1
Brit Prawat
Ashley Flowers