Shadows Over Sydney: Anita Cobby

True Crime Brewery contains disturbing content related to real-life crimes. Medical information is opinion based on facts of a crime and should not be interpreted as medical advice or treatment. Listener discretion is advised. Welcome to True Crime Brewery. I'm Jill. And I'm Nick.

There are some nights that just settle into silence, and others that echo long after they've passed. Back on February 2nd, 1986, the city of Sydney, Australia, was winding down on a warm summer evening. Streets empty, lights dimmed, and the night quieted. But something went terribly wrong that night, something that would leave a mark on a family and countless other lives. Anita Kabi was a nurse and a daughter, just a kind and pretty young woman who was just trying to make her way home that night. What happened to Anita would become one of Australia's most haunting criminal cases, a story filled with unanswered questions.

some chilling revelations, and a real darkness that is almost impossible to comprehend. So join us today for Shadows Over Sydney, as we step into the night and trace Anita's last known moments, examining the investigation that followed, and confronting the events that really shook a nation to its core. And this case was recommended to us by Margaret, and Dick is here with The Beer Review. Thank you. It's getting more difficult for me to find some Australian beers. Unfortunately, I had a friend who had gifted me this, and the beer's been hanging around for a while. This is Chestnut Pilsner, brewed by Bridge Road Brewers in Beechworth.

It's a class of beer called Herb and Spice Beer. These are generally not my cup of tea, but we've got to go with what we've got. So the beer is a hazy golden color with a small head that faded to bits of lacing. It has an aroma of citrus and grain with just a bit of malt sweetness in the background. Taste of hops, crisp hops, mild malt sweetness, a little bit more of grain, crisp and dry finish, fairly light body, and enjoyable. So it's not a bad beer. Oh, no. No. We try not to drink bad beers. That's probably wise, yeah. And before we get started, I'd just like to point out to anybody that wants to send us a note saying that February is a winter month, not in the Southern Hemisphere. It's summer. Yeah.

Yeah, I think most people will know that, but it's not bad to remind them. Because it did catch me a little off February summer, but then, you know, my next thought was Australia. I did the same thing. Yeah, yeah. But yes, it was a warm night. And this is just a horrendous crime, I'm going to say right now. We will say, you know, basically what happened, but we're certainly not going into any of the details because it was a horrible, horrible thing that happened to this young woman. And so many people have suffered afterwards. So a horrible crime. Yeah, the degree of violence inflicted on this woman is just horrendous. Really? Yeah, absolutely. So let's open the beer and then we'll get started. Okay.

So Blacktown is a large government area that's about 37 kilometers west of Sydney. And it was made up of a patchwork of suburbs, including the neighboring area of Prospect. So in the 1980s, Prospect still had a rural feel with open farmland and stretches of dirt roads. Though Sydney's suburban expansion was beginning to reach that area, much of this region still had a quiet, country-like atmosphere. Now at the same time, this region had many challenges. Rising unemployment and an increase in drug-related crime were part of everyday life there. And while incidents of violence were not uncommon, they usually happened within known circles of people.

Crimes involving strangers were very less frequent. But then, in early 1986, something happened that would unsettle the community and draw national attention. On the morning of Tuesday, February 4th, a local dairy farmer in Prospect noticed something unusual. His cows had gathered closely together in one area of the paddock, something he'd never seen before. He first noticed it while heading out around 9.30 a.m., and when he returned a couple of hours later, the animals had not moved from that spot. So something wasn't right, and he decided to take a closer look.

What he found would shock and horrify him. In that isolated patch of land, quiet and away from the busier roads, he had discovered the body of a woman. So he hurried back to his house to call the police. This tragic discovery would mark the beginning of a case that would resonate far beyond Prospect and even Sydney, leaving a lasting mark on those in the community and beyond. So it wasn't long before the first officers from Blacktown Police Station arrived. They spoke quietly with the dairy farmer, asking if he had noticed anything unusual in the days before. He did hesitate, but then he recalled being startled awake late one night.

though he couldn't be sure whether it had been Saturday or Sunday night, but he had heard the sound of some distant screams. The noise, he said, had come from the direction of Greendale Road, not far from his property. It was a quiet, secluded road, surrounded by trees and sometimes visited by young people on the weekends. So the farmer had fairly assumed at the time that it was some rowdy behavior or late-night partying that he was hearing. It wasn't so unusual or alarming to him to make him investigate, so he'd gone back to sleep, never imagining that this could be a murder that he was hearing. Now, standing at the scene, that memory was very upsetting for him, and it always would be.

As police secured the area, forensic teams began to work. Detective Sergeant Graham Ricks was called in, and he had been on leave, and he was told to come immediately. So alongside his colleagues, including Detective Sergeant Ian Kennedy, who would go on to lead the investigation, they began examining the area in detail. The victim was lying a distance from the road in a place that showed signs of a struggle. For the investigators there, the scene was shocking. Even the most experienced officers were affected by this crime scene. One detail stayed with them, the expression on the young woman's face, which served as a silent reminder of the suffering that she had endured.

The detectives at the scene would comment on and always remember that there was a tortured expression on the young woman's face. There was little at the scene to help the investigation out at first. Among the few items recovered was a distinctive ring, three interlocking bands of white, rose, and yellow gold. Its uniqueness gave detectives hope that it might lead to an identification of the victim. Now, back at the Blacktown police station, Detective Kennedy looked over the missing person's reports, and it didn't take long to find one that matched, a report filed by a man named Gary Lynch, who had been searching for his 26-year-old daughter since the night of February 2nd.

When Kennedy saw the young woman's photo, he knew that this was the victim. Her name was Anita Cobby. Detectives visited the Lynch family a short time later. Anita's parents, Grace and Gary, were waiting at the house along with Anita's sister, Catherine. Through their conversations, a picture emerged of who Anita was. She was a victim of what seemed to be a tortured death. But beyond the tragedy, the detectives would learn about Anita's life. She'd been a caring and thoughtful person, the eldest daughter in a very close-knit family of four. Her sister looked up to her, and they were very close, even though they were five years apart.

Anita also had a creative side, and she enjoyed drawing. She'd done well in school, and in her teens, she had entered and won a local beauty pageant. But her ambitions went well beyond that. Anita could have been a model or gone on to win more beauty pageants, but that just wasn't for her. Instead, she chose a path of caring for others, actually following in her mother's footsteps to become a nurse. It was work she loved, and she was good at it, dedicating herself to helping people in her community. She moved into the nurses' living quarters and trained at Sydney Hospital. Now, it was during her nursing training in Sydney when she met John Covey, her future husband.

Their lives had taken different paths before, but now they found common ground and their connection grew into love. What began as a simple conversation led them to having a first date, and then another. And over time, their relationship was built on shared moments and quiet routines. Now those who knew Anita held onto memories of her warmth, her compassion, and the life she'd still been building. A life that had meant so much to all of the people around her. And for the detectives working on the case, her loved ones would serve as a reminder. This was not just about solving a crime. This was about seeking justice.

for a person whose life had touched so many others, and whose potential would never be met. So let's talk a little bit about Anita growing up. She was born in November of 1959, the first daughter of Gary and Grace Lynch. She and her younger sister Catherine spent a lot of time together growing up. Anita was known for being kind, generous, and really just easy to be around. She loved the simple things, like going shopping with her sister. She did very well in school at Evans High in Blacktown, and for a while, it looked like maybe her life would go in a completely different direction, because in 1979, she entered the Miss Western Suburbs pageant and won.

So John Covey was very different from Anita. He was just three years older, but he had taken a more winding path to get to nursing training. He hadn't been very interested in school, and he'd spent a lot of time traveling, working odd jobs, and just surfing all around Australia. Nursing wasn't something he'd planned on at all. It was more something he kind of just fell into. But once he tried it, he found that he really enjoyed it. So when their paths crossed at the nurses' living quarters at Winston Lodge, John, who was then 23, noticed 20-year-old Anita right away.

He later would recall thinking how beautiful she was, with her curls and her upbeat presence. He felt like she was way out of his league. When he found out she'd been Miss Western Suburbs, it only made him more sure that she wouldn't be interested in someone like him. But then, one day, they just started talking. And to his surprise, Anita seemed just as interested in him as he was her. And that gave John the confidence to ask her out. And she said yes.

So their first date was at a small Lebanese restaurant in Surrey Hills called The Prophet, and it was pretty close to the hospital. It went so well that they went back again the very next night. And before long, they were regulars there, chatting with the staff and even getting to know the owner. It would become their place. They became friendly with the owner, who thought they were very taken with each other, thought they were just a really cute couple. So this relationship grew quickly. As they spent more time together, it didn't take long for everyone at the nurse's living quarters to know, hey, this is a couple. They were clearly happy together, and to the people around them, it was obvious that they had fallen in love.

So after being together for about a year, they decided to get married. They set the date for March 27th, 1982. To add to their excitement, Anita then found out that she was pregnant. And although it was soon, they were both excited at the idea of becoming parents. But just a couple of months into the pregnancy, Anita had a miscarriage.

They were both really heartbroken by this, but they were young and they felt confident that they would have a chance to try again. They didn't take a honeymoon, but instead they used their savings to rent a house in South Sydney, close to John's family. Anita and John's sister were close, and they spent a lot of time at each other's houses. Meanwhile, Anita continued working at the hospital, where she built a reputation as a skilled and carried nurse. John worked in different hospitals, doing temporary nursing assignments because it paid better. Since John had always wanted to own his own boat, they bought a sailboat. Anita really wasn't into sailing, but she enjoyed sitting in the sun with their two dogs.

It was 1984 when things changed, and they both decided to try something new. John had wanted to train horses, and he had a cousin who would help them out. So they moved to Coffs Harbor, which was 530 kilometers north of Sydney. John worked nights as a nurse and trained three horses that he owned during the day. And Anita was able to get a nursing job there as well. And John went ahead and won $10,000 betting on a horse race. Nice payoff. He told Anita that this was her chance for her to do what she wanted to do, and she chose traveling. So they visited the United States, first Los Angeles, and then New York. And after that, they went on to Italy. After a short time, they ran out of money.

and ask their families back home for a loan so they could continue traveling. And once that money was gone, they did actually return home. So Anita and John returned to Sydney in mid-1985. They got back to their old routines, but Anita was restless and wanted to travel some more. John was ready to start a family. So it became clear that they were in different stages of their lives and that they were wanting different things. They separated, hoping that taking a break from each other would make things clearer. John went back to live with his mother and sister in the Sydney suburb of Rockdale. Anita went to live with her parents in Blacktown. Yeah, so we don't know a lot about why they separated. The consensus...

with John and other people in their family and friend group is that they would have been back together, that it was a temporary thing. But of course, we'll never know that because Anita never survived. Right. She wasn't around, so. But it wasn't a contentious separation. Did not seem that way. They were still talking pretty often. So I think it was more of just they weren't sure they wanted to do the same things at that time.

They were quite young and they enjoyed traveling and doing things. So it's not like they wanted to just get an apartment and have a family, you know. But definitely people believed, friends, family, that she still loved John. And John would say he definitely still loved her. Although I don't think her parents were super thrilled with him just because, you know, he wasn't quite the stable provider that they may have wanted for her. Yeah, plus they might be holding it against him for the other stuff. Oh, absolutely. I mean, he held it against himself. A lot of guilt, as you can imagine.

So she's back living with her parents, and six weeks after their separation was Sunday, February 2nd, 1986. That day, Anita got up early and had breakfast with her mother, and she told her mom she'd be back late that night because she was going out to dinner in Redfern with two of her girlfriends after work. That night, 26-year-old Anita finished her shift and met friends for dinner before heading home. She took a train to Blacktown, where she had recently been living with her parents. Arriving close to 10 p.m., she followed her usual routine and went to call her father for a ride. But the station phone was out of order.

So she decided to make the short walk home alone. And that was like a two kilometer walk. Nothing terrible. No, it wasn't. And she normally would have called for a ride, but her father would also say she's not the type of person who ever would have called a taxi. She was going to walk it. Yeah.

So along that quiet suburban road, a car pulled up beside her, and inside were five men. Anita was forcibly taken, and what followed would become one of the most shocking crimes in all of Australia's history. On the morning of Monday, February 3rd, Grace looked in her daughter's bedroom and saw she had not slept there. So she assumed Anita must have spent the night at a girlfriend's. But then they got a call that afternoon. This was Anita's supervisor at work, asking if they had seen Anita. She had not shown up for her 130 shift. This was very strange, because Anita was always reliable. So that got her parents, Gary and Grace, really beginning to worry. Oh, yeah.

because they knew it was not like Anita to not tell anyone where she was. They both felt like something bad had happened to her. Yeah, it didn't take long for them to have a very bad feeling about this. So it was 6.30 p.m. that Monday when Anita's dad, Gary, went to the Blacktown police station. He brought with him a photo of Anita and reported her missing. In the meantime, Grace began calling Anita's friends, reaching out to everyone whose number she had, but no one could tell her where her daughter was. So it was 8 p.m. when Grace made one last phone call, and this was to John Covey. She reached him through his mother, Terry, at their home in Rockdale. Terry answered the phone, and when Grace asked if Anita was with John,

Terry said she didn't know, but she would contact him and have him call her back. Terry immediately called John at his favorite restaurant then. The owner, Michael Sari, who knew both John and Anita, answered the phone. John was there having dinner with his father and a friend. When he got on the phone, Terry told him that Grace had called, asking if Anita was with him. So this was surprising to John. He quickly called Anita's parents and told them, no, Anita was not with him. The last time he had spoken to her was the previous morning, Sunday, February 2nd. Now, despite their separation, they did still speak regularly.

And during that call, John had asked if she wanted to spend time together after work, but Anita had turned him down, saying she already had dinner plans with her friends and had promised her parents she'd go home afterward. So John hadn't pressed the issue, but that would be the last time he would speak to her. After the call, John became very worried. He knew Anita well, and she was not the kind of person to disappear without telling anyone. So he returned to the restaurant table and apologized to his father and friend, saying he had to leave immediately. His father questioned him, but John explained that Anita was missing and he needed to go.

So he first drove about 40 minutes south to Lillifield to drop his friend off, then made the one hour and 20 minute drive northwest to Blacktown. On the way, he stopped to buy a bottle of scotch. When he arrived at Gary and Grace's house, he poured a drink for himself and for Gary. John began asking questions. Who had they called? Had they contacted hospitals in case Anita had been hurt? Gary, who already had this strained relationship with John, didn't take this questioning well at all because to him, he felt like John was suggesting that they weren't doing everything they could to find Anita.

And at the same time, Grace was just pacing anxiously around the house. So after just being there for a short time with Anita's parents, John felt he really wasn't welcome there. And not wanting to cause them more stress unnecessarily, he decided he would leave. The next morning, John set out to follow through on the plans he had already made with Anita. They were meant to go to Shelley Beach on the central coast, which was about 100 kilometers north of Sydney, where his sister Gaynor had rented a house for her birthday. So John was hoping Anita just might be there. Maybe something had come up, and she'd gone ahead without telling anyone. As he drove, he listened to the radio, thinking about Anita.

remembering how they used to sing along together to songs. Then suddenly, the music was interrupted for a news alert, and what he heard next made him feel ill. A report came over the radio. The body of a young woman had been found in a paddock at Prospect in Western Sydney. Police had not yet identified her, so John had tried to reassure himself that Anita was already at his sister Gaynor's house in Shelley Beach. He even imagined her sitting there talking and laughing like she usually did.

But the thought nagged at him. The report about a young woman found in a paddock at Prospect just would not leave his mind. He pulled over as soon as he saw an emergency phone, jumped out of the car, and hurriedly called the operator, asking to be connected to Grace and Gary. His voice shook as he tried to explain, and it took some time before the operator could understand him and put the call through. When someone finally answered, it was a woman's voice he didn't recognize. All he heard was, you've got to get back here, John, before the woman hung up the phone. So very ominous. He immediately got back into his car, turned around, and drove straight to Anita's family home in Blacktown. And when he arrived, he went to the back door.

But as he reached for the doorknob, his emotions overwhelmed him. He had to sit down on the steps and cry. After a while, he gathered himself together, stood up, and went inside the house, pretty much knowing what he was facing now. Inside the house were Gary and Grace, Anita's sister Catherine, Catherine's husband, and two police detectives. By the time John arrived, the detectives had already shown the family a distinctive wedding ring they had found. Catherine thought it looked like Anita's at first, but she'd hesitated. She noticed marks on it and said it couldn't be the same one. Detective Ian Kennedy gently clarified that what she had thought was rust on the ring was actually blood.

Once John arrived, the detective showed him the wedding ring, and he immediately recognized it as Anita's. Detective Kennedy then took John aside and asked if he would be willing to formally identify her body. And John said he couldn't bring himself to see his wife that way. But the police needed someone to do it. And at first, Grace volunteered. As a nurse, she said she'd seen many bodies and believed she could handle it. However, the detective refused that request. He didn't want Anita's mother to remember her like that. Yeah, because remember, police said she looked horrible. You could see on her face that she had been tortured. So I don't even want to think about what that looked like. So the responsibility then fell to Gary, who agreed to go.

Catherine's husband went with him for support. At the hospital morgue, when the sheet was pulled back, Gary's knees gave out and he collapsed. The detectives caught him and helped him steady himself. When he was finally able to speak, he quietly said, I wish I could say it was someone else's daughter, but it's not. Yeah, really just a kind man. He had said at another time that he'd like to wish it was someone else's daughter, but then someone else would have to suffer that and he wouldn't wish that pain on anyone else. Nope. So afterward, detectives drove Gary back home to Blacktown and on the way they explained that identifying Anita was only the beginning and that the investigation ahead was going to be long and difficult.

They also warned him that the case would attract a great deal of media attention. Because of how serious the crime was, police asked Gary to speak to the press when he felt able to help share who Anita was and encourage the public to come forward with any information. Detectives also explained that, as part of standard procedure, they would need to speak with everyone who'd been close to Anita, including John, and Gary understood this. When police returned to Blacktown, they asked John to come to the station. John went, unsure of what to expect. At first, the questions were straightforward, how long he and Anita had known each other.

how long they'd been married, and details about their separation. John explained they'd been trying to work things out and get back together. Then the questions became more serious. They asked where John had been on Sunday night when Anita went missing and on the following day. John said he'd been home on Sunday night and out to dinner with his father and a friend on Monday when he had first learned Anita was missing. Detectives also asked about the state of their relationship. As you can imagine, they're recently separated, so police are going to definitely go right to him as the first suspect. John repeated that they were still close even though they were separated. Then the questioning shifted.

and he was directly asked if he had killed her. John was pretty stunned by this, and the questioning continued to intensify. He found himself really overwhelmed by these accusations. Now, earlier that day, an anonymous tip had suggested police should look into John. Also, two nurses who'd been with Anita the night she disappeared said that since their separation, John had been calling her often at work and seemed upset about their being apart. They believed he'd been trying really hard to win her back, and it was also mentioned that Anita may have recently grown close to another male nurse named Ian, which drew more interest from investigators.

Because of this information, John became a key suspect very early on. However, after reviewing the autopsy, detectives believed two very important things. Anita's death likely occurred late Sunday night into early Monday morning, and more than one person was probably involved. While John was considered a suspect, the nature of this crime did not appear to be an act driven by emotion. Anita's body was discovered in a secluded area not far from where she'd been taken. The tragedy would deeply affect the entire nation, raising questions about safety, justice, and the kind of violence that can shatter even the most ordinary of nights. When Anita's body was discovered, the shock was immediate and overwhelming. Authorities acted quickly, announcing a $50,000 reward for information that might lead to arrests. Police were determined to retrace her final moments. In one striking effort, an officer even dressed like Anita and took the same 9.12 p.m. train to Blacktown.

hoping to jog the memories of passengers who may have seen something. And as the investigation continued, the story dominated the front pages. Details began to emerge slowly and painfully, and the sense of collective grief in the community turned into something much deeper. Anger, disbelief, and a strong demand for justice. If you think you might like more of our storytelling and analysis of both little-known and well-known crimes, let me just tell you about an option we have where you can subscribe to our premium show. And you can do that by going to tiegrabber.com slash subscribe or on Patreon at patreon.com slash tiegrabber. Once you subscribe, you can enjoy every episode without ads so you can stay immersed in all the sordid details without any annoying interruptions like this one. And you'll get access to exclusive bonus episodes too about some of our most fascinating and disturbing true crime cases. So if you're interested, head on over to tiegrabber.com slash subscribe.

or patreon.com slash tie grabber and become part of our tie grabber community. Police began by retracing Anita's movements on the day she went missing. She arrived for work at 7 a.m. and worked the same shift as her colleagues, Lynn Bradshaw and Elaine Brady. After their shift ended at 3.30 p.m., the three stayed in the hospital visitor's room, talking and drinking coffee, until around 5.15 p.m. They weren't in any hurry to get out of there, were they? No. Well, they're out, you know, hanging out. Probably a lot to talk about with patients and whatnot. There always is. There always is. So they left the hospital. They spent the evening at a restaurant, sharing a meal and two bottles of wine, and left at about 8.30 p.m. Lynn drove Anita to Central Railway Station, arriving around 9 p.m.

Lynn left her at the entrance to the railway station. Before parting ways, they said they would see each other the next day. This was the last time anyone who knew Anita saw her alive. So they weren't even out late, really. That's fairly early. Really a very tame night. A little wine with girlfriends. Yeah. Now, in the early hours of Wednesday, February 5th, a breakthrough in the case finally came. A young police officer new to the force and someone who had gone to school with Anita was reviewing message sheets at the station. These sheets recorded calls from members of the public, and there was one note that really caught his attention.

This referred to a call made by a young boy who, along with his sister, had heard a woman screaming outside their home on Newton Road. When they looked out the window, they'd seen a woman being forced into a car. Newton Road sat between Blacktown Railway Station and Anita's family home, so that's right along the path she would have walked if she was going to her parents' house. Up until that point, detectives believed Anita had been dropped off at Central Station, but they were still trying to confirm whether she'd made it back to Blacktown by train. So it now seemed like she had, and that she'd been abducted after getting off of the train. Police had responded to that original call on Sunday night, and they had searched the area.

but at the time they hadn't found anything. Now, realizing its significance, detectives quickly went to Newton Road to speak with these witnesses. At the house, they met 13-year-old John and his 14-year-old sister Linda. Linda explained to them that she had been in the living room on Sunday night when she heard a woman screaming from the street. When she looked outside, she saw a dark-haired woman struggling as a man tried to force her into a car, and she immediately called out to her brother. So John ran to the window and he saw it too. He ran outside hoping to help, but by then it was too late, the car had already sped away. So he ran back inside the house and called the police.

A few minutes later, their older brother Paul arrived home with his girlfriend Lorraine, and after hearing what had happened, Paul and Lorraine got into their car and drove in the direction the other two had seen the vehicle go, hoping to find it. So these are people who are acting, you know, a lot of times people don't. Yeah. Yeah, so that's impressive that they tried. Now both John and Linda described the car as white or a light-colored sedan. John added it had a gray undercoat, and it had driven toward Greendale Road. Now as Paul and Lorraine searched the area, they did come across two cars, one red and one white sedan that matched the description. They approached the white car carefully and looked inside, but saw nothing suspicious.

so eventually they just had to go back home. Meanwhile, the responding police patrol also searched the surrounding roads, but they found nothing at the time either. Now, as detectives continued speaking with people on Newton Road, more witnesses came forward. One woman reported that her 16-year-old Stephen had heard screams while watching TV that night around 9.45 p.m. Looking outside, he saw a woman being forced into a car by several men. He would report seeing the driver and a man who was high up to the car's ceiling, like he may have been holding Anita down as she was continuing to scream inside the car. He could see the face of the driver and a second man.

and he remembered making eye contact with a man named John Travers. A neighbor and his girlfriend jumped in their car along with Stephen, and they took off after the car, but the abductor's car had gotten away from them, although they continued to drive around for a while looking for it. In another nearby area, a woman reported hearing screams as well. When she looked outside, she saw several men forcing a woman into a car. However, investigators could not be certain if that sighting involved Anita. Anita's killers stole her purse and filled their car with gas using her money. Detectives also began to piece together why Anita may have been walking alone that night. The distance from Blacktown Station to her parents' home was just about two kilometers. Normally, she'd call her dad Gary to pick her up, but remember on that Sunday night, all 12 public telephones at the station had been vandalized.

Now you have to wonder if it was her abductors who did that. But with no way to call, Anita likely just began walking home on her own. So police checked with taxi drivers in the area, but Anita's dad, Gary, was certain that Anita would never have taken a taxi. It had been a warm, pleasant summer evening, and walking home would have been normal. It would have felt safe to Anita. For investigators, these new witness statements were crucial. For the first time, they were beginning to understand what had happened and where Anita's journey had taken this tragic turn. Across Sydney, newspapers and media outlets covered this story closely, and the city was shaken by the crime.

Anita was described by everyone who knew her as kind, compassionate, and gentle. Someone who left a lasting impression on those around her. People struggled to understand how something so devastating could happen. So calls began pouring into Blacktown Police Station with members of the public offering up names, tips, and suggestions about who might be responsible. Police followed up on every lead, including checking known sex offenders in the area. But none of these early tips led them anywhere. In addition to John Cobby, detectives also focused on another early suspect. Just 45 minutes after Anita's body was discovered, a man was found parked in his car near the crime scene. When police searched his vehicle, they discovered several kind of suspicious items, including a knife, hedge cutters, a tomahawk, and a spade.

He was taken in for questioning, where he explained there'd been a strike at his workplace that day. So he said he'd stayed in his car instead of going home, because he didn't want to argue about his wife about not being at work. So detectives did check his story and verified his alibi, and he was eliminated as a suspect. On the morning of Friday, February 7th, the case took another unexpected turn. During a popular radio program, host John Laws read excerpts from Anita's autopsy report on air, something that shocked listeners across the country. The response was immediate. Calls flooded into the station, with many expressing anger and in distress. Some felt it was deeply disrespectful to Anita and her family, while others were horrified by the details themselves. Yeah, I think that initially, Anita's family was very upset by this. But then after time went by, they saw it, you know, as a positive thing to get that out there, how awful it had been, and maybe get more attention of people. I don't know.

I could see how upsetting it would be to hear that, but I could also see some kind of benefit to it. But I guess the point here really is that it was just horrible. This is a horribly violent murder. On the night of February 2nd, as Anita was walking home from Blacktown Railway Station, there was a stolen car carrying five men that pulled up beside her. She was forced into that vehicle despite screaming and trying to resist, with nearby witnesses hearing her cries and many attempting to intervene, but the car sped away before help could reach her.

Now, from what we know now, inside of this car, Anita pleaded with her attackers to let her go, but they ignored her. She was assaulted as they drove her through the area, eventually taking her to that secluded paddock outside of Blacktown. And once there, the violence continued. After some time, one of the men became concerned that Anita would be able to identify them. And that's when the group made the decision not to leave any witness behind. Anita was driven down Rean Road to the secluded paddock while being held down in the car.

raped repeatedly and beaten by these five attackers. They then dragged her into the paddock along a barbed wire fence where they dumped her and continued to sexually and physically abuse her for quite a long time. According to his taped confession, one of the attackers, John Travers, then became concerned that she could identify them because she'd seen their faces and heard their names. So, apparently urged on by the others, Travers cut her throat, nearly severing her head. So the leak of the autopsy report did outrage the authorities.

The New South Wales Police Commissioner at the time, John Avery, was particularly concerned about how such sensitive information had been made public. An internal investigation was launched, but the source of this leak was never identified. Despite this controversy, the broadcast pushed Anita's case into the national spotlight. With the story now reaching audiences across Australia, public attention and pressure on the investigation did intensify. The premier of New South Wales, Neville Rahn, who had met Anita years earlier when she won a local beauty pageant, took a personal interest in the case. He requested daily briefings from police, and when he was first given a copy of the autopsy, he was unable to read it beyond the first page, finding it just too distressing. He later described the crime as something beyond human comprehension, saying the acts were so horrific, they did not feel human. And all across Australia, people struggled to come to terms with what had happened. Even the detectives working on the case felt the emotional weight of it.

Led by Detective Kennedy, the team worked around the clock, and in just under three weeks, they would identify and arrest five men. They were young. Two of them were just 19, and the others were brothers in their 20s and 30s. All came from difficult backgrounds. All were known for minor offenses, but now they were accused of something way more serious. So to understand this case, we really need to take a look at the five men responsible for what happened that night. They were John Travers, Michael Murdoch, and three brothers, Michael Gary and Leslie Murphy. At the time, they ranged in age from late teens to early 30s. They weren't all related, but they were connected by friendship, by environment, and by a shared history of crime. None of them were unknown to police. Between the five of them, there was already a long list of prior offenses, things like theft, assault, robbery, and drug-related crimes.

So it turns out that individually, they weren't seen as exceptionally dangerous. But together, as a group, they formed something far more dangerous. In many ways, they reflected the social issues facing parts of Western Sydney at the time. High unemployment, disengagement from school, and cycles of low-level crime that over time escalated into something much more serious. And that escalation is essential to understanding what happened. Yeah, at the center of this group was John Travers. He was just 18, but he was widely seen as the dominant figure. So like the youngest, or just about the youngest, was the head man. Yeah, I think so. In a couple of books I've read about the case, he...

had raped before and been violent before. So this wasn't his first time doing something like that, although probably his first murder. Now, he did have a very troubled upbringing and had been involved in criminal activity since his early teens, had been an alcoholic since he was 11 or 12. By the time he reached adulthood, he already had a reputation for aggression and violence. Those who later looked back on the case often described him as someone who influenced the people around him, especially those who were younger or more impressionable. During the investigation, Travers became a key figure, not only because of his role on that night, but because of what he would later admit. Before the trial began, he pleaded guilty, but even after that admission, the legal consequences for the group would ultimately be shared. So then there was Michael Murdoch, 19 at the time. Murdoch was one of the younger members of the group and a close associate of Travers. The two had spent a lot of time together, and like Travers, Murdoch already had a criminal record.

His involvement speaks to something important in this case. This wasn't about isolated individuals making independent decisions. It was about a small network of young men whose behavior had been building, reinforcing itself over time. And in that environment, risk-taking became normal, and boundaries became blurred, and accountability pretty much disappeared. The three remaining young men were brothers, Michael Gary and Leslie Murphy. They came from a large family and had grown up in some very difficult circumstances. And by 1986, each of them already had a pretty good-sized criminal history. The oldest, Michael, had spent time in prison before.

The younger brothers were following similar paths. Their involvement highlights a pattern sometimes seen in cases like this, where criminal behavior isn't just individual, but reinforced within family and social structures. So what might begin as smaller offenses slowly intensifies, especially when it's normalized within these close relationships. What makes this case so deeply unsettling is how these five people came together. On their own, each of them had committed crimes. Serious ones, yes, but not extraordinary. Together, they became capable of something far beyond what any of them might have done alone.

Investigators later pointed to this group dynamic as a key factor. Peer influence, shared behavior, and a lack of intervention were all contributors. In that moment, there was no one to stop what was happening, and no one was willing to walk away. It wasn't just one person acting. It was a collective failure. It was mob mentality. So once they went to court, the prosecution relied on a legal concept known as common purpose. It meant that even if only one person carried out the final act, all five could be held responsible if they understood what was happening and continued to take part.

Responsibility in this case wasn't limited to one single action. It extended to the choices each person made or failed to make throughout that night. So after an intense investigation, all five men were arrested within weeks. Their identification came through witness accounts, informants, and eventually their own statements to police. In June 1987, after a trial that captured the full attention of the country, all five men were found guilty, and each was sentenced to life imprisonment. And in a decision that reflected the severity of this crime, the judge recommended that they should never be released.

The names of these five men would forever be tied to one of Australia's most infamous cases. The public reaction at the time was overwhelming. Anger, grief, and calls for harsher punishments echoed across the country. But beyond the individuals involved, the case left a very lasting impact. It forced people to confront difficult questions about violence, about responsibility, and about how warning signs in people's lives can be missed and overlooked. In the end, this part of the story isn't just about who these men were. It's about how their paths came together on one night, and how those decisions led to consequences that could never be undone.

The reaction from the public was very intense. The community didn't just want answers. They wanted accountability. At the first court appearance in Westmead, the atmosphere was tense, almost volatile. Crowds gathered outside, some holding signs calling for the return of the death penalty. There were uniformed nurses standing in quiet solidarity and a heavy police presence bracing for unrest. So it was clear that this case had really struck a nerve in the public.

And as the accused were brought to court, the anger was palpable. When the prison van later left the hospital grounds, the crowd surged forward, shouting, banging on the sides of the vehicle. It was a stark reminder. This wasn't just a legal case. It was something deeply personal for many. And yet inside the courtroom, the process had to remain measured because no matter how public opinion swelled, the legal system still had its role to play. One of the central arguments would hinge on what's known as common purpose. That's a principle that can hold multiple people equally responsible for a crime, even if only one person carried out that final act.

The prosecution argued that, regardless of individual roles, everyone involved that night shared responsibility for what happened to Anita. Now, the defense told a different story, that one man alone was responsible for the fatal act, and the others should not be judged in the same way. It would become a complex legal battle, shaped not only by evidence, but by larger questions about responsibility, fairness, and justice. Behind it all was a difficult truth. Even in cases that serve deep emotion, the law must carefully weigh each person's role. For those involved in the trial, on every side, it was not an easy task, but it was a necessary one. On March 16, 1987, the trial finally began.

said at Darlinghurst, Sydney's historic central criminal court. By then, the weight of the case was unmistakable. The bar table was packed. Five, sometimes six, barristers in robes, flanked by their solicitors, an unusually crowded scene that reflected what the press had already begun calling the trial of the century. At the center of it all sat the Crown Prosecutor, Alan Saunders, QC, known, maybe somewhat ironically, as Slipper, but there's nothing soft about him.

Stern and unsmiling, he stood closest to the judge with his own lectern, commanding the courtroom with a reputation built on experience and formidable courtroom skill. Those who faced him before knew exactly what that meant. This was a man who dominated proceedings, not just through his presence, but through precision and control. There was no warmth between counsel on either side. Only rivalry, sharpened over years. Yeah, each day began with ritual. A sharp knock echoed through the courtroom doors, and all eyes turned as the judge entered. Led by his tip staff, dressed in a black frock coat and carrying a ceremonial staff crowned in gold, Justice Maxwell followed. Though not physically imposing, he carried himself with unmistakable authority.

dressed in the striking scarlet robes of the Supreme Court. He embodied the formality, the dignity, and the quiet gravity of the law. But outside of that courtroom, the usual calm of Darlinghurst had vanished. On that first morning, the place felt almost overwhelmed. Prospective jurors crowded the front steps and spilled onto the surrounding lawns near Taylor Square. Media crews were everywhere, television cameras rolling, radio reporters speaking into microphones, and journalists filling the press benches inside. The trial had become more than a legal proceeding. It was a national event.

Inside, everything was in place. The police had completed their investigation, the magistrate had committed the case, and now the judge, jury, and counsel stood ready. Yet there was a noticeable tension surrounding the defense. Many of the lawyers were working for small legal aid fees, far from glamorous and certainly not lucrative. In fact, taking part in a trial like this often carried reputational risk rather than reward. These were not cases that built careers. They actually tested them. And the question hung in the air, both inside and outside the courtroom. Why would anyone choose to take on such a case?

it was a question asked repeatedly by strangers by colleagues even within families why represent someone so widely condemned why step into a case where the public had already made up its mind But, you know, the answer did not lay in public opinion. It was a principle. Because the trial wasn't just about the accused, it was also about the system itself. Legal aid born out of the idea that everyone deserves representation seemed almost on trial alongside of the defendants. At its core was a difficult but essential truth. The justice system only functions if even the most unpopular individuals receive a proper defense. And I'd say that's something we see a lot is, as someone who follows true crime and watches a lot of trials, the public are really harsh on defense lawyers who are just doing their job.

They are. They are. But if you don't like the defendant, you're really not going to like their lawyer. I'm sure. So it's really a tough job to have. I do have some sympathy for them. Someone has to represent these people. Yes. And that's sort of the corollary to that is that the defense lawyers are viewed as being unfair to the witnesses. Right. They can demonize the dead person. Yeah. But that's kind of their job. Yeah. It's easy to forget that that's part of their job. Oh, it really is. Yeah. Well, in cases like this where public anger runs so deep and emotions are so raw, a lawyer just kind of faces a choice. You've got one path to go through the motions and simply create the appearance of fairness. But the other is really hard.

To fully step into the role, to advocate properly, and to ensure the trial is as fair as the law demands. And that's regardless of how the client is viewed and hated in this case. So inside that courtroom, that choice really mattered. When the prosecution opened its case, Alan Saunders lived up to every expectation. His words were measured, deliberate, and unflinching. He laid out the Crown's case with force, describing Anita Cabe's ordeal in stark, confronting terms that really underscored the seriousness of the charges and the gravity of the trial.

It was a moment that set the tone for everything that followed. And in that moment, it became clear to everyone there. This was not just another case. It was a trial that would test not only the accused, but the strength, integrity, and fairness of the justice system itself. So from the outset, it was clear this was not going to be just an ordinary case. The courtroom itself carried a strong sense of ritual and authority, and each day began with the formal entrance of Justice Maxwell, preceded by his tip staff. Yet outside, the atmosphere was anything but calm. We had large crowds gathering, and the media presence was just overwhelming. This was more than a criminal trial. It had really become a national moment.

The case also placed the role of legal defense under intense scrutiny. Many questioned why any lawyer would represent individuals so widely condemned. But beneath that question was the deeper issue, the integrity of the justice system itself. Legal aid does exist to ensure that everyone, regardless of public opinion, receives fair representation. So in a case defined by widespread outrage, that principle was really tested, and it was tested in full view of the public.

So inside the courtroom, that tension was just constant. It never let up. The defense faced a stark reality. There was little public sympathy, and much of the evidence was deeply confronting. Yet the responsibility remained the same, to ensure that the trial was conducted fairly. When the prosecution opened its case, Saunders delivered a powerful and deliberate address. He outlined the Crown's position with clarity, emphasizing the severity of the crime and setting a serious tone for the jury. The first witness brought an immediate shift in the room. It was Anita's father, Gary Lynch. He took the stand to formally identify his daughter.

His presence, dignified and restrained, cast a heavy silence over the courtroom. He and Anita's mother attended the trial every day, maintaining composure, despite the deeply painful circumstances. The evidence presented was complex, and in many respects it was technical. There were no eyewitnesses to the crime itself, so the case relied heavily on the accused men's own statements to police. Legally, each confession could only be used against the person who made it, unless others agreed with its contents. So this created a layered and challenging situation for the jury, who had to determine the role and responsibility of each individual separately.

Now, at its core, the trial centered on three critical questions, whether each of the accused was involved, to what extent they were involved, and whether that involvement amounted to murder or a lesser charge like manslaughter. The defense argued that one individual acted independently in carrying out the fatal act, while the others denied responsibility for murder. And this argument created some serious challenges, because even if some defendants claimed limited involvement, their presence and their actions raised some difficult questions. Defense strategies often aim to minimize involvement or shift attention away from the most damaging evidence. But in a case like this, such arguments were very difficult to sustain, pretty much impossible. Well, yeah. How do you explain it? Well, you were free to rape her, but then you didn't want to have anything to do with killing her. I know. Well, we know in the United States, it would have been felony murder for everyone. Right. And probably the death penalty, because we still do that here. Yes. Well, throughout the trial, the jury remained central. They were instructed to weigh the evidence carefully, free from prejudice, despite the intense attention surrounding the case, which couldn't have been easy. Now, their deliberations took time, extending overnight, really reflecting the seriousness that they were putting towards approaching their task.

So in the end, their decision was clear. All five accused were found guilty on all counts. No surprise. No, it really isn't. It's just the bits I've picked up here. Yeah, they were all involved. Of course they were, yes. I mean, we didn't go deeply into what happened, but yes. She was brutally assaulted and raped and murdered. Yes. With all five of them present. When sentencing day arrived, the tension in the courtroom was palpable. Anita Cobby's parents were present, as they had been throughout the trial, maintaining remarkable dignity.

Justice Maxwell, visibly affected by the case, delivered the sentences with emotion. Each of the men received life imprisonment, along with additional concurrent sentences or related offenses. And then in an extraordinary step, the judge recommended that each file be marked with the words, never to be released. So I guess that means they're going to not have any chance of parole. Well, this is something that is like very unusual. This isn't something that normally happens. You have to think these are young men, some of them very young. And if you're deciding they're never going to have a chance again, these crimes have to be dreadful. I mean, you're marking them as irredeemable. Right. Right.

So the courtroom briefly descended into disorder as emotions overwhelmed the proceedings, really an indication of how deeply the case had just affected everyone involved. In the end, the trial did more than deliver a verdict. It forced a nation to confront some difficult questions about justice, fairness, and the role of the legal system in even some of the most confronting cases. It demonstrated that, despite overwhelming public anger, the process had to remain measured and principled, and they did manage to do that, not an easy task. Because in cases like this, the strength of the justice system is really tested. It's really the hardest to uphold.

The privacy of the jury room meant that the details of their deliberations remained unknown, but they'd been clearly instructed by the judge to set aside any prejudice and to fulfill their duty faithfully, as outlined in their oath. Rather than reaching a quick decision that could have been influenced just by public sentiment, the jury did deliberate carefully throughout the day and into the night. Their approach appeared conscientious, and at times they sought clarification from the judge through the proper channels in open court. By the following morning, their decision was delivered, and all of the accused were found guilty on every single count. When the morning of sentencing did arrive, there was this sense of anticipation.

Proceedings were delayed briefly when Anita's parents were not yet in court, but once they got there, the final step, the formal delivery of judgment, began. Most in the courtroom expected life sentences, though there lingered a distant question of whether release might one day be considered. When the judge entered and took his seat, the five accused were brought into the dock together for the first time since the trial began. Police filled the courtroom, and the tension was just overwhelming. Emotions were high, and at one point, even the usually composed judge appeared affected, pausing before he could continue speaking. As he delivered the sentences, penal servitude for life...

The courtroom's tension briefly gave way to disorder, with sheriffs struggling to restore the calm. Additional sentences were imposed for the related crimes, though they were effectively overshadowed by these life terms. The judge concluded by recommending that they were never to be released. Like I said, just not something that's commonly done. Really kind of remarkable. Well, he's always within guidelines. The system works for him. Yes, I know. But if you go back over these five men's lives, the way some of them grew up was really horrible. And that's never an excuse to me for what they did. But I think that it's something that society needs to look at. Like, what kind of people?

Are we creating and putting out there these kinds of situations? And then just someone who's going along living a good life gets taken off the street and basically tortured and having her life taken away. If nothing else, it's just extremely sad. All these kinds of cases are. It's sad, of course, for Anita and her family. But it's just sad that people are even that way, you know, the perpetrators. Why? I mean, these are people who definitely have no respect for life, no empathy towards another human being. And they should be released. They should never be free. No, they shouldn't. So I agree with that.

So again, thank you to Margaret for recommending this case. Not being people who live in Australia, I'd never heard of it, but clearly a very well-known case in Australia. As I went into the research, I definitely saw it was very well-known in Australia, a very significant case. So why don't we do a little feedback and then we can wrap things up for the day. It's time for listener feedback.

She's got a few emails today. All right. You want to do the first one or you want me to do that? Oh, you can rest your voice for a minute. Okay. Thank you. So this is an email from Alicia who says, hi, I have a case suggestion. Have you covered the case of Vicki Morgan? And we haven't, right? We have not. Okay. Once I started looking into it, I remembered the case. Oh, you did? Okay. Yeah, just vaguely. Vicki Morgan was a mistress of Alfred Bloomingdale, who was the CEO of the famed department store. Vicki lived in Colorado and had what could be called a somewhat difficult childhood. And her father disappeared shortly after her birth and she and her mom lived in poverty. Okay. And she became pregnant at age 16.

left the state after giving birth to a boy baby. She moved to Los Angeles, where she worked as an usher at Grauman's Chinese Theater and maybe some other activities. And then before her 17th birthday, she married a guy named Earl Lamb, and he was 30 years older than her. So she's 17, he's 47. Yikes. Yes. That didn't work out, clearly. That didn't work out. She did meet Alfred Bloomingdale at a restaurant on the Sunset Strip in California, quickly became his mistress. And when she was 18, Bloomingdale offered Lamb, her husband, a sum of money if he would divorce Vicky, which he did. Wow. For a short time, Vicky lived a lavish lifestyle. However...

Bloomingdale's wife learned of the affair, which was not any secret, really. He didn't try and hide it very well, no. But she demanded Bloomingdale end the relationship. Well, I mean, she was kind of a child. She was. Yeah. At that point, she was, what, 18? 18, yeah. By 1979, Vicki had been through two more marriages and was earning money as a sex worker. She had also become addicted to drugs and entered rehab. And once in rehab, she met a man named Marvin Pancoast. And this was a gay man who had become infatuated with her. In fact, they moved in together.

when they got out of rehab. Now, money was a constant issue. So after selling off anything of value, Vicki filed an $11 million lawsuit against Bloomingdale's estate because he had died in the interim. The same palimony lawyer, Marvin Mitchelson, was her attorney. Now, what was this lawsuit about? Her lawsuit against Bloomingdale? Yeah. I mean, she was his de facto wife. Oh, and she should have gotten some money. She should have gotten some money. Okay. So in 1983, Vicki was beaten to death by Pancoast, who was under the influence of something and had really no memory of the being. Even though she had died, her palimony lawsuit continued.

And in 1984, her estate was awarded $240,000. So that's a far cry from the $11 million they've been asking for. That just sounds like a really difficult life. Oh, it sounds like a horrendous life. It really does, yeah. Now, Vicky's son, Todd, was raised by his grandmother. He earned a PhD and taught business at various colleges, most recently Cleveland State University. Then in 2023, he was shot to death in his home. So you say, oh, my God. Well, what do we know about that? I haven't found anything, really. This is like a footnote. I'm just wondering if the recommendation is to talk about his murder?

Or just hers? I would include both. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. That's an interesting thing I had never heard of. So thank you, Alicia. We'll definitely look into covering that one. Seems to be a lot going on there for sure. So the next email is from Nate. He writes, hello, Dick and Jill. I hope this finds you both doing well and hopefully you aren't wilting in the Southwestern heat. Thank you, Nate. Can I suggest a case to cover that I was involved in advocacy for? Her name is Sarah Jo Pender and I believe she was wrongly convicted of double murder in Indiana.

So Sarah Jo Pender was convicted, along with her then-boyfriend Richard Hall, of murder in the deaths of their roommates, Andrew Cataldi and Tricia Nordman, in October of 2000. Sarah has claimed innocence from the very start. She escaped from prison in August 2008 after a writ of habeas corpus was denied, but was captured in December after an episode of America's Most Wanted was aired. An innocence team from Georgetown University has been working with Sarah, but as of January 2026, her appeal was denied. Sarah Pender was convicted on the basis of a letter written by her to Hall, where she admitted to a role in the double homicide.

and by the testimony of another inmate. There is a lot of evidence that shows the letter was not written by Sarah. The inmate who implicated her has been known to say anything that would help him out. Oh, fascinating, huh? Yeah, this is, I was thinking of today's episode when I was looking at this. She was not present when the murders occurred. She was out on a trip. Oh, really? Yeah, all people involved were having arguments with each other. It was not a happy household. Oh, okay. Well, that's a good one to look at, Nate. And Nate has one more suggestion for us? He actually has two more, but this is the first one. All right. Well, you're right. I happen to have another case suggestion for my favorite true crime host.

The Tank Left Murders in New York in 1988. This is one, I think, maybe it wasn't Nate, but someone recommended before, and I actually have a folder. You know, being an older person, I printed a lot of stuff. So a big physical folder of information. This is a fascinating case, which I'm kind of surprised we haven't covered it yet. But anyway, for those of you who aren't familiar, the Tank Left Murders in New York in 1988. Their teenage son, Martin, was wrongly convicted of the murders of his parents, Seymour and Darlene.

He was incarcerated until 2004 when he was freed on appeal. So much corruption in this case. I included a link for more information on the case if you're interested. As always, I'm your biggest fan. Thanks, Nate. Yes, I actually have quite a bit of information on this one, and I think it's one we planned on covering, and then it just kind of got brushed to the side for a while. So thanks for bringing it back to our attention. A quick summary. It was September 7th, 1988. Seymour Tankleff and his wife Arlene were killed in their home. Their son Martin was arrested, tried, and convicted of the murders.

He was sentenced to two consecutive terms of 25 years to life in 1990. In 1993, his convictions were affirmed by the New York Supreme Court. In 1997, a writ of habeas corpus was denied. Tankleff and his attorneys continued to work on his release. In 2003, his lawyers presented new evidence, as well as having a new suspect. In 2007, the New York Supreme Court vacated his sentence. The state of New York would not bring any further charges against Tankleff. Tankleff has since returned to school, and he got a law degree. He sued the state of New York for wrongful conviction and emotional distress, and he was awarded a settlement of $13.4 million. In 2017, he filed a federal lawsuit, and in 2018, he reached a settlement, $10 million. Now, this was a wealthy family.

Yes, yes. Because I remember, I don't know if it was his graduation or his 18th birthday, he got a nose job. And, you know, poor folks don't do that. I don't believe that. And there's one more suggestion here from Nate. This is Jane Andrews, the former personal dresser to Sarah Duchess of York, who was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2001 for the murder of her lover, Thomas Cressman. So Andrews killed Cressman in 2000 by hitting him with a cricket bat and stabbing him, later claiming she acted in self-defense. She was released in 2015, recalled in 2018, and re-released in 2019. So Jane Andrews had a fairly normal childhood and was an average student. She had a history of depression and an eating disorder.

and had one attempt at suicide. She was 21 years old when she answered a newspaper ad and soon found employment as the dresser for Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York. So Andrews apparently loved this job, particularly the enhanced social status that it brought her. After working for the Duchess of York for two years, though, she was fired. Buckingham Palace said it was a cost-cutting measure, but Andrews believed it was due to her friendship with the Duchess of York. In 1998, Andrews began dating Thomas Cressman, who was a successful businessman. In September 2000, she and Cressman took a holiday in Italy. Andrews expected a proposal and was deeply wounded when that did not happen. On their return to Great Britain, Andrews killed Cressman by hitting him with the cricket bat and then stabbing him several times.

So she was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. She was not a model prisoner, however, with negative interactions between her and the staff and other prisoners. She escaped once and then was finally freed in 2019. That's crazy. I've never heard of that. And I've heard a lot about Fergie and Prince Andrew, especially in the last five years or so. We've seen a lot of documentaries and read a lot on, well, even Sarah, a little shaky on her too. Oh, more than a little. Yeah. So it's not just him. No, they were actually both. They knew Jeffrey Epstein quite well, let's just say. Yes. Both of them did. We'll leave it at that. Yeah, we'll leave it at that for now. Okay.

Well, someday, if we really, really get motivated to do a lot of work, we'll cover the Jeffrey Epstein case, which would be a lot of work. That would be something we'd have to invest in months to do that. Yes. Not more. Yeah. I'm not sure I could live that long. Well, hang on there. Try. See what you can do, okay? I will. All right. Well, thank you, everyone, for listening and for your feedback. I know we do have some voicemails, which we'll play next time. We didn't get around to playing them this week. So thank you so much for everything. And we'll see you next time at the quiet end. Come on down. Plenty of seats. Plenty of seats. Bye-bye. Bye, guys.