On April 27, Rachel went to Gary's house ( her fiances dad) seeking help contacting her fiancé. Rachel and Gary got into an altercation. Gary’s past, marked by criminal behavior, control issues, and strained relationships, raises concerns, especially given his rocky history with Rachel. Today we discuss who Gary is and shock you with information about his communication (or lack thereof) with the police.

Support the show

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1884993352147717

The content of this episode reflects the opinions and commentary of the hosts based on publicly available information. We are not asserting any legal claims or making factual determinations regarding any individuals discussed. All persons mentioned are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

The information presented in this episode is based on official police reports and publicly available records.

The hosts and contributors of this podcast are not journalists, licensed news reporters, or legal professionals. The content presented in this podcast is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only.

Any opinions expressed are solely those of the individual speakers and do not reflect the views of any affiliated organizations, employers, or sponsors. The information shared is based on personal research, experience, and publicly available sources, and should not be considered professional advice, legal advice, financial advice, medical advice, or factual reporting.

While we strive for accuracy, we make no representations or warranties regarding the completeness, reliability, or accuracy of any information discussed. Listeners are encouraged to independently verify information and consult qualified professionals for specific advice or services.

...

We know Rachel was killed on June 4th. But to understand what happened, we have to go back to June 2nd. In early June 2022, Rachel returned to her apartment after losing her job at a ranch in Queen Creek. But the place she came back to may not have been the same home she left behind. The unit had been sublet to two tenants who had just been evicted. Then came the night of June 2. Something happened inside that apartment, something unsettling enough that it still raises questions about what Rachel may have walked into. And then there’s the pickle jar. It sounds trivial, until you realize it’s one of the strangest and most unexplained details in the entire case. When did it appear? And why do memories about it seem to change depending on who you ask? And then there’s a man named in police reports as a person of interest. Later that month, detectives collected his fingerprints, DNA, and photographs during a police operation. But heavily redacted reports leave one haunting question: Why him? In Episode 3, the deeper we look, the darker the picture becomes.

https://www.youtube.com/live/75-6L6FqZ3o

https://web.archive.org/web/20081203033217/http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Papers/Py104/loftusmem1.pdf

Support the show

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1884993352147717

The content of this episode reflects the opinions and commentary of the hosts based on publicly available information. We are not asserting any legal claims or making factual determinations regarding any individuals discussed. All persons mentioned are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

The information presented in this episode is based on official police reports and publicly available records.

The hosts and contributors of this podcast are not journalists, licensed news reporters, or legal professionals. The content presented in this podcast is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only.

Any opinions expressed are solely those of the individual speakers and do not reflect the views of any affiliated organizations, employers, or sponsors. The information shared is based on personal research, experience, and publicly available sources, and should not be considered professional advice, legal advice, financial advice, medical advice, or factual reporting.

While we strive for accuracy, we make no representations or warranties regarding the completeness, reliability, or accuracy of any information discussed. Listeners are encouraged to independently verify information and consult qualified professionals for specific advice or services.

...

A 19-year-old woman calls 911 in the middle of the night and tells the operator she’s been shot by an unknown intruder. Police rush to the scene. But years later, the questions about what really happened inside that apartment are still unanswered.

In episode two of the Rachel Hansen case, we move into the hours immediately following Rachel’s murder — the moment when confusion, urgency, and the first pieces of the investigation began to unfold.

We walk through the chilling 911 call Rachel made after she had been shot, the early timeline laid out in police reports, and what we’ve learned through conversations with sources connected to the case.

As the picture begins to form, we also run into the places where it suddenly stops — large portions of the evidence remain heavily redacted, leaving critical details hidden from public view.

Throughout the episode, we want to acknowledge the people who have worked on this investigation and, most importantly, Rachel’s family and loved ones, who continue to live with the weight of what happened that night.

Piece by piece, investigators began building a picture of what may have happened inside that apartment.

But even now, years later, many of the most important questions remain unanswered.

Support the show

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1884993352147717

The content of this episode reflects the opinions and commentary of the hosts based on publicly available information. We are not asserting any legal claims or making factual determinations regarding any individuals discussed. All persons mentioned are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

The information presented in this episode is based on official police reports and publicly available records.

The hosts and contributors of this podcast are not journalists, licensed news reporters, or legal professionals. The content presented in this podcast is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only.

Any opinions expressed are solely those of the individual speakers and do not reflect the views of any affiliated organizations, employers, or sponsors. The information shared is based on personal research, experience, and publicly available sources, and should not be considered professional advice, legal advice, financial advice, medical advice, or factual reporting.

While we strive for accuracy, we make no representations or warranties regarding the completeness, reliability, or accuracy of any information discussed. Listeners are encouraged to independently verify information and consult qualified professionals for specific advice or services.