 adds heard during the podcast that are not in my voice are placed by third party agencies outside of my control and should not imply an endorsement by Weird Darkness or myself. Stories and content in Weird Darkness can be disturbing for some listeners and is intended for mature audiences only. Parental discretion is strongly advised. Welcome Weirdos, I'm Darren Marlar and this is Weird Darkness. Here you'll find stories of the paranormal, supernatural, legends, lore, the strange and bizarre, crime, conspiracy, mysterious, macabre, unsolved and unexplained. Coming up in this episode… In 2007, a 16-year-old boy was tried and convicted as an adult for the assault and murder of a woman in Wisconsin. But is it possible that Brendan Dassey isn't guilty as we were all led to believe? After a night of bar-hopping, Ozzy Condi and girlfriend Kimberly Long got into an argument that ended up with Ozzy laying on the floor, dead. Kimberly was sent to prison. At least that's the story the prosecutors told. But Kimberly fought for years to try and convince people she was not a murderer. But was she? The idea of someone breaking down and confessing to police that they committed a crime when in actuality they did not do it seems ludicrous to us. But it does happen all the time. Why on earth would someone ever do such a thing? We'll look a bit closer at how it happens. If you're new here, welcome to the show. And if you're already a member of this Weirdo family, please take a moment and invite someone else to listen. Recommending Weird Darkness to others helps make it possible for me to keep doing the show. And while you're listening, be sure to check out WeirdDarkness.com where you can find me on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Miwi and more, along with the Weird Darkness Weirdos Facebook group. Now, bolt your doors. Lock your windows. Turn off your lights. And come with me into the Weird Darkness. Is Brendan Dassy Innocent? This has been the hot question since 2007, when the then 16-year-old Dassy was convicted, along with his uncle Stephen Avery, of the murder and sexual assault of photographer Teresa Hallback. The conviction of Brendan Dassy was based off of an infamously suspicious confession, which many people believe he was coerced into, given the conditions under which it was conducted, along with additional controversy surrounding facts and evidence in the case. It was general knowledge that Dassy had limited mental capabilities, and the sudden confession didn't seem to sit right in the big picture. Tried and convicted as an adult, Dassy was sentenced to life in prison and had been incarcerated for nine years when in July of 2016 his conviction was overturned. Like other people who were wrongfully convicted, Dassy once again became a popular subject in the news, as the world waited to see if he would walk for a crime many believed he did not commit. However, in December 2017, a 7th Circuit Court panel upheld his original conviction and dashed the hopes of any chance of freedom. No crime is easy to solve, especially with the technicalities of the law, but the Dassy case continues to stump juries and create conversation, ultimately leading up to the million dollar question, was Brendan Dassy coerced into giving the confession that cost him his life in prison? The crime the Wisconsin resident Dassy supposedly confessed to involved the murder of 25-year-old photographer Teresa Hallback, encouraged by his uncle Stephen Avery, who was also convicted, Dassy confessed that he partook in the assault, stabbing and eventual dumping and burning of the body on the family's auto salvage lot. Before Dassy's confession, nearly all evidence in the case pointed towards Avery. Avery has his own troubled past with the law, having infamously served 18 years out of a 32-year sentence when he was wrongly convicted of the brutal assault of a jogger, only to be exonerated nearly two decades later by updated DNA technology. Once a free man, he proceeded to file a lawsuit against the county for $36 million. In 2005, after she had been reported missing by her parents, police found Hallback's car on Avery's property, where Dassy also lived, and the following search turned up her charred remains on the land, as well as her personal belongings. A controversial trial ensued, and four months later Brendan Dassy confessed to helping with the crime. The two were convicted separately and sentenced to life in prison. Perhaps the most glaring concern regarding Dassy's confession is the fact that the police interrogated him entirely alone. He had no lawyer or parent present, despite the fact that he was only 16 years old. Overall, the interviews which are videotaped and can be viewed on YouTube come to over eight hours of footage, eight hours of a solitary teenage boy getting grilled aggressively by multiple police officers. In the videos, one sees a young, shy boy who seems nervous and awkward as he hesitantly recounts the events, often replying, I guess. One of his strongest defenders and attorney, Laura Nyreider, commented, The moment I watched that tape, I wanted to jump into that TV screen and get between that child and the officers who were interrogating him. To be interrogated without representation is often bad news for any suspect, but many think this to be the precise situation that enabled law enforcement to coerce Dassy into giving the confession that they wanted to hear. Another key element in the possible coercion of the then teenage Dassy is the fact that he has a below average IQ, placed somewhere between 69 and 73 points on the intelligence quotient scale. In general, a score of 70 is used as the cut-off mark for intellectual disability. All of this was known prior to the confession, as Dassy was placed in special education classes at his local high school. It was with this knowledge that police proceeded in interrogating him alone, despite the fact that he was likely nowhere near mentally equipped to fully grasp the implications and scope of what was being asked of him. Experts in false confessions criticize what is known as the READ technique, the style of interrogation that was used on the 16-year-old Dassy. Stephen Drizzen is the co-founder of Northwestern University's Center of Wrongful Convictions of Youth and said the interrogation tactics used by the detectives violated core principles of the READ technique. The READ technique is an exhaustive nine-step process in which a suspect is interviewed prior to interrogation in order for the authorities to determine whether an interrogation is justified. Allegedly, the technique wears down suspects until eventually confession is often easier than battling accusations. Not only would this be taxing on a mentally limited teenager, but videos of the interview show that the police officers steered away from general READ protocol and fed Dassy specific information, eventually even asking him outright who shot Hal back in the head. This setting of the scene and feeding of facts makes it very easy for suspects to inadvertently agree with a story that has been designed by the authorities and is not necessarily the truth. All of the forensic evidence involved in the case, be it the DNA, the bullets, the car or the fingerprints, was associated entirely with Stephen Avery. Dassy's conviction is based solely on the controversial confession made after a grueling series of interrogations. As Mark Fremden, the lawyer who later represented Dassy, said, all of that was the Stephen Avery case, so Dassy's case was purely a circumstantial evidence case. Dassy's entire life came down to what he said in those rooms, on those tapes. Yet he received the same sentence as his uncle, whose blood and sweat and fingerprints placed him physically at the crime. During trial in 2007, Dassy chose to recant his confession, claiming that he had been pushed into confessing to a crime that he didn't commit. When asked why he'd made up the confession, he continually responded, I don't know, and hardly displayed any emotion. He went on to explain that he'd gotten the idea from a book called Kiss the Girls, which he claimed to have read three or four years ago. In conversations with his mother after the first interrogation session, Dassy remarked that they got to his head. Part of his overturned conviction was due to the fact that during interrogations, investigators said he would not be punished if he admitted participating in the offenses and that he had nothing to worry about. Those who believe in Dassy's culpability often harp on this question. Why would he confess if he wasn't guilty? Why make up such a detailed story? The answer is, it is not unheard of for innocent people to confess to crimes they did not commit. For example, take the case of Juan Rivera, who was convicted of rape and murder three times in 1992 despite DNA evidence excluding him. He served 20 years in prison until the state of Illinois finally overturned his conviction. His attorneys eventually accused police of coercing him into falsely confessing. Authorities interrogated him repetitively over the course of four days and allegedly took advantage of his low IQ, his difficulty with English, and a psychological breakdown that he suffered while in custody. Sound familiar? The Innocence Project, founded in 1992, is an organization devoted to exonerating those who are wrongly convicted through DNA testing and reforms the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. According to their data, out of 225 wrongful conviction cases that were eventually cleared by DNA evidence, 23% were based on false confessions. Comparably in a study of juvenile cases, out of 340 exonerations, 42% involved false confessions. In a study conducted by The Psych Report on false confessions involving minors, they found that teens and children being interrogated are often falling prey to high pressure, manipulative and deceptive interrogation techniques more often because they have less sophisticated reasoning abilities and are more susceptible to social influence. Brendan Dassey fits into these categories as well as the added handicap of his low IQ, making him, according to these studies, a prime candidate for a false confession, a widely held opinion given the fact that there was even an attempt to overturn his conviction. It was no secret that Stephen Avery had a rocky past with the law, having served 18 years for a wrongfully convicted rape assault case. In 2003, Avery filed a $36 million civil law case against Manitowoc County, its former sheriff and former district attorney for the wrongful conviction and imprisonment, the same county in which he was convicted for murdering Hallback. Needless to say, relations between Avery and local authorities were poor at best. In 2015, Netflix's series Making a Murderer helped to cast doubt on the evidence used to convict both Avery and Dassey. They pointed out several incidents in which it appears as though there were slight holes in the investigator's protocol, be it laziness or more glaring offenses, like the suggestion that Manitowoc County planted evidence at the crime scene to incriminate Avery, such as showing off the vial of Avery's blood that had been tampered with from Avery's 1985 wrongful conviction case. But long before the Netflix series, tensions had been building between Avery and the authorities regarding the investigation. That is, until four months in, Dassey made his damning confession, which conveniently confirmed Avery's presence and execution of accused events. It is clear from the videos that the interrogations led against Dassey were aggressive and swift in clinching his confession. But was this all a part of a larger plan, just to ensure Avery's conviction? Coming up, after a night of bar hopping, Ozzy Conde and girlfriend Kimberly Long got into an argument that ended up with Ozzy laying on the floor, dead. At least that's the story the prosecutors told. But Kimberly fought for years after being sent to prison to try and convince people that she was not a murderer. But was she? That story is up next on Weird Darkness. What goes on in the mind of a murderous killer? What is it about some people that lead them to commit murder? Is there something that is different or is it simply a switch that gets turned on? Murderous minds, stories of real-life murderers that escaped the headlines, offers a look into the lives of individuals who didn't just become killers but who managed to avoid the media storm that usually accompanies them. Inside, you will hear about people like Santé Kheims, a 65-year-old mother who was driven by greed and who committed multiple murders with her son. Robert James Akramant, the MBA graduate who murdered three people in order to continue getting lap dances from a stripper that he became infatuated with. Larry Jean Ashbrook, who became deluded into thinking that strangers were accusing him of murder. When he could not take it anymore, he carried out a massacre at the Wedgewood Baptist Church and more. Each story harbors its own distinct narrative and reasoning for the perpetrators of these heinous crimes, along with the background to the case, their lives, and the aftermath of their actions. Sometimes, the truth is more appalling than anything fiction can provide, and murderous minds pruse it once again. Murderous Minds, Volume 1, Stories of Real-Life Murderers That Escaped the Headlines, by Ryan Becker, narrated by Weird Darkness host Darren Marlar. Hear a free sample or purchase the title on the audiobooks page at WeirdDarkness.com. On the evening of October 5, 2003, California Emergency Room nurse Kimberly Long got into an argument with her boyfriend Oswaldo Ozzy Conde. The two had been drinking throughout the day, and after things got heated, Long left her and Conde's shared home to go cool down. When she returned to her home later in the evening, she found that her door was unlocked, she entered her home, and found Conde slumped over, already deceased. Conflicting evidence and ineffective counsel, landed Kimberly in prison for seven years, prompting the California Innocence Project to take on her case. According to Kimberly Long, she and her boyfriend Ozzy got into an argument late at night on October 5, 2003. The two had been bar hopping with their friend Jeff Dills earlier in the evening. They returned home at around 11 p.m., which is when Long says the argument started. According to Long, Conde was not happy with the way that she was acting in public. I think Ozzy said I was running around at the bar we were at. I wasn't paying attention to him and I was talking to everybody else, and I think that's what the argument started out as. By the time we got home, I was really agitated and just wanted him out of the house. I said a bunch of horrible things and told him to get out. I think the argument was about me being drunk and a flirt. Friend Jeff Dills spoke to the investigators and told them more about the couple's fight, saying she started hitting him with her helmet. She had her helmet and her purse and she swung at him a couple of times and he just went like this and he covered himself in defense. She hit him on the shoulder and stuff. He had a big motorcycle jacket on so I know it wasn't bothering him, and he was just trying to calm her down. He told investigators that she only hit him in the face one time and that's when he stepped in between them because she hit him in the face and I saw his expression change like I might hit you back. Dills then claims he broke up the fight and told the couple to either finish it inside or get some space from one another. He said if they didn't do this he would call the cops. Long then went with Dills to cool off. In order to cool off from their fight, Long decided to go hang out with Jeff Dills. She left the house that she shared with Condé where Dills said the argument was happening and went with Dills. Later, Dills dropped Long back off at her shared home with Condé although the time is not exact. Long claims Dills dropped her off at 2 a.m., but Dills remembered dropping her off at 1.30 a.m. Unfortunately, Dills perished in a motorcycle accident shortly after Condé's demise, so investigators were not able to confirm the time discrepancy with him. When she returned, something fell off. She recounted the evening to the Coachella Valley Independent saying, I remember walking through the door and it was unlocked when I came in. I saw a light on in the back. I kicked off my shoes and I saw Ozzy on the couch and I called his name. I walked over to the light to turn it on and when I did that, I turned around and I saw a big blood stain on the couch. I saw him and I realized that something went wrong. I thought maybe he had gotten into a fight. I don't remember what I did first, to be honest. I think I ran outside and tried to get Jeff. I ran through the house and I can't really remember. I do remember that I got real close and I looked at him and I realized with what I saw, there was nothing I could do to help him. As authorities started questioning potential subjects, including Kimberly Long, the then emergency room nurse believed she knew who the real culprit was, one of Condé's exes, Shiana Lovejoy. Lovejoy shared a child with Condé and the two dated up until about 2001 or early 2002. Long alleged that Lovejoy sent her a malicious letter meant to intimidate Long. According to Long, the letter alleged that Lovejoy had relations with Condé while Long and he were dating. Long told authorities that neighbors had seen two men sent by Lovejoy outside her house a month before Condé's demise. Friends of Condé told the California Innocence Project that Lovejoy could easily be the offender. You know, we never thought that it would actually go this far, but it has. I mean, it makes sense. I mean, the way she is. It took. I'm sure it was her. I mean, I'm positive. There's nobody else. She was going to end him all the time. I mean, it's only obvious, you know? Since Long admitted to having an argument with Condé hours before his demise, authorities had no choice but to consider Long a suspect. When Long was brought in for questioning, they administered a polygraph test. Long passed the polygraph test when she claimed innocence. Police apprehended her in the clothes that she claims that she'd been wearing out that night, and there wasn't a drop of blood on them. Still, authorities were suspicious of Long, especially after the couple's friend, Jeff Dills, told them that Long had hit Condé in the shoulder during their heated argument earlier in the evening. After Long and Condé got into an argument at their front door, Long left with Jeff Dills to cool down. Originally, she told police that the two had just hung out, but later she revealed that she and Dills were intimate. The two went back to Dills' residence where they got into the spa. According to Dills, Long continued to complain about Condé and how he was not carrying his share financially. According to the case's statement of facts, Long ended the encounter abruptly and lied, saying that her ex-husband was supposed to swing by and drop off her kids. Dills said that she was preparing to leave. Long mentioned that she could, to clean it up a bit, kick Ozzy's butt. Eric Keane, who acted as Long's public defender in the immediate aftermath of the incident, believes that Long's ex-husband, Joe Bogarski, could be a suspect. During the first trial, Keane pointed out that a stereo went missing from Long and Condé's shared home while Condé was being targeted, suggesting somebody else was present. According to ABC News, Long started dating Condé when she and Bogarski were still married. As their marriage dissolved, Long kicked Bogarski out of their shared home and Condé moved in. Keane, along with other defenders of Long's innocence, believed that this could serve as motive for Bogarski. Kimberly Long's first trial started at the beginning of February 2005 and as the trial came to a close, jurors were split. The prosecution painted Long as a party girl with a temper and questioned why she didn't try to administer first aid when she first found Condé, citing her profession as an emergency room nurse. Public defender Eric Keane reiterated that Long's ex-husband had a history of verbal threats and that he used to live in Long's home, making him a potential suspect. The jury was torn. After three days of deliberation, they were deadlocked. Nine jurors were in favor of acquittal, while three wanted to convict Long. The court was forced to declare a mistrial. Judge Patrick F. Majors put Long on a $100,000 bond and ordered her not to have any contact with any attorneys or witnesses who were part of the case. He even said that he would have found her not guilty had this not been a juried case. To make a perfectly clear record in this matter, if this was a court trial, if the court would have heard the evidence in this case, I would have found the defendant not guilty. I would have found that the evidence was then sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. That is my trial court decision in this case. Obviously, it was not a court trial, it was a jury trial. Ozzy Condé perished after being hit in the head but no weapon or evidence directly linking Long to any such object was found by authorities. Forensic scientists were able to determine that Condé had been hit between three and eight times and he may have been asleep at the time. Prosecutor Gerald Feynman believed Long was responsible for Condé's demise, citing her growing frustration with him despite the fact that no weapon was found and her clothes were clean. She was upset because she wasn't living the dream lifestyle that she wanted to live, Feynman said, suggesting that this was motive enough for her to take her boyfriend's life. In December 2005 Long was tried again and this time the prosecutor was able to convince the jury of her guilt due to timeline discrepancies. Jeff Dills claimed that he dropped Long off at her home around 1.30 am, roughly 40 minutes before Long made the 911 call. He was one of the case's key witnesses and unfortunately he perished in a motorcycle accident before Long's trial took place. Other witnesses, like Long's neighbors, presented conflicting timelines. One said that they heard Dills' loud motorcycle exhaust leave just minutes before Long entered her home and ran out crying. Public defender Eric Keene presented a timeline that placed a different offender such as a jealous ex or a burglar at the scene. She doesn't call the police until 2.09 in the morning and she tells them that she just walked in the door. The point that the jury focused on was that all her statements didn't match the timeline, prosecutor Gerald Feynman explained. Long was convicted. Long started serving her sentence in March 2009. She originally failed to turn herself in after all her appeal processes had been exhausted. She turned herself into police 10 days late. Soon after the California Innocence Projects took on her case in hopes of exonerating her. The organization cited a lack of evidence, saying that Long's case was an example of wrong place, wrong time. Justin Brooks, the director of the California Innocence Project explained, this is one of those classic cases where the person who finds the dead person ends up being a suspect. Her case was paper thin when it went to trial and now when you consider what we know since then, it's absolutely a certainty that she's innocent. Long was released in 2016 and she compared her time in prison to torture since she had to be separated from her children as they grew up. I'm a mom, so anybody else who's a mom who misses out on that time, they get it. They understand that one day is too long, but seven years and three months, that's torture and it's wrong. The California Innocence Project enlisted two time-of-death experts to take a closer look at Conde's demise. Dr. Harry James Bonnell, who had worked as chief medical examiner in San Diego, determined that Conde's time of death is more consistent with 11pm. He also said that the state of Conde, when paramedics arrived, suggested early stages of decomposition, meaning he had perished some time before Long returned home. Dr. Zhong Zhuo also testified, saying that Conde passed long before 120am, given the rate of decomposition. In June 2016, Long was released. Judge Patrick F. Majors overturned Long's conviction due to her ineffective counsel argument. Her original defender, Eric Keane, had neglected to prove that she had not changed her clothes during the night, which would have likely had some blood on it if she was responsible, and to provide forensic evidence determining the time of Conde's demise. In February 2018, the California DA announced that it would appeal her release. However, in November 2020, the California Supreme Court upheld her release. The idea of someone breaking down and confessing to police that they committed a crime when in actuality they did not do it seems ludicrous to us, but it happens all the time. Why on earth would someone ever do such a thing? We'll look a bit closer at how it happens when Weird Darkness returns. El Trinon Blackwood's novella The Willows was originally published as part of Blackwood's 1907 collection The Listener and Other Stories. It is one of his best known works and has been influential on a number of later writers. In fact, horror author H.P. Lovecraft considered the story The Willows to be the finest supernatural tale in English literature, and you can hear the story The Willows by Algernon Blackwood absolutely free. Visit the audiobooks page at WeirdDarkness.com to find it. The Willows by Algernon Blackwood at WeirdDarkness.com slash audiobooks. There are more innocent people who pleaded guilty than you might think. It seems mind-boggling that anyone would confess if they haven't actually done anything wrong. So who are these innocent people who confessed to crimes, and why do people confess to crimes they didn't commit? Arrested individuals make false confessions for a variety of reasons, though unfair circumstances and abuse figure into many cases. If you're vulnerable and being treated inhumanely while being questioned, there is a good chance that you'll say anything just to have it all be over. But that's the problem. It's not over. False confessions often lead to years in prison and even the execution of guiltless parties. So why do innocent people confess to crimes? Usually because they're forced to, because they feel like they have no other choice. But once that admission of guilt is out there, it's hard to take it back. One of the biggest arguments against torture, besides the fact that it's inhumane, is that the information and confessions received during torture are often unreliable or untrue. For example, Mohamed Ramadan, a police officer at Bahrain International Airport, was arrested in 2014 under suspicion of attacking other officers. He was innocent, but was tortured until he made a false confession. The torturers even admitted that they knew he was innocent, but they were angry with him for attending pro-democracy rallies. Ramadan was convicted and is sentenced to be executed. Sometimes an innocent individual can become so convinced of their own guilt that they actually believe they committed a crime. Peter Riley discovered this firsthand when he found that his mother was dead in their home in 1973. He was brought in by the police who told him that he had failed a lie detector test. He hadn't. Between that lie and hours of questioning, investigators essentially bullied him into believing that he had killed his mother. He even wrote a confession saying, I remember slashing once at my mother's throat with a straight razor I used for model airplanes. Riley was eventually exonerated, but only after he spent time in prison for a crime that he didn't commit. Sometimes confessing is presented by the authorities as the easy way out. Stefan Kizko was accused of the brutal murder of a young girl, Leslie Molesied, in 1975. He was told that there were two options. If he confessed, he would be eligible for parole. If he didn't confess, then he would spend the rest of his life behind bars. So, he confessed, knowing that his confession was false. Kizko assumed that the police would look into his story, find out that it wasn't true, and let him go. Well, they didn't. Despite recanting as soon as he was given a lawyer, Kizko spent 16 years in prison for a crime that he didn't commit. In 1934, three black farmers, Arthur Wellington, Ed Brown and Henry Shields, were accused of murdering white planter Raymond Stewart. They had confessed to police, but only after an extremely violent interrogation that included brutal whippings. They were convicted and sentenced to be hanged, but they appealed. In the resulting landmark case Brown v Mississippi, the Supreme Court ruled that confessions obtained through violence undermined the right to due process. The men's sentences were reversed, though they ended up serving time for manslaughter. After 14 to 30 hours of interrogation, you'd probably confess too. That's exactly what happened to the Central Park Five. Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, Antron McCrae, Yusef Salom, and Kerry Weiss, they all confessed to the rape of a female jogger in Central Park in 1989. They later recanted their stories, saying that they had only confessed because they were worn down and forced to by the police. In fact, a serial rapist was later found guilty of the crime with the help of DNA. The wrongfully imprisoned men received $41 million settlement because of their treatment. Plee bargains can tempt false confessions. In 1990, Michael Phillips was misidentified in a photo lineup for the rape of a 16-year-old girl. But because he was black and the victim was white, he worried that a jury wouldn't believe his innocence. Rather than risk a longer sentence, he pleaded guilty and received 12 years in prison. Phillips ended up serving 24 years. He was finally exonerated when another man's seaman was matched to the rape kit in 2014. Some cases really catch the public eye, and that makes them magnets for false confessions. Maybe people want to become famous for being associated with the crime, or perhaps they're just obsessed. Whatever the reason, crimes like the infamous Black Dahlia murder in 1947 led to multiple false confessions. One of the men who confessed, Daniel S. Voorhees, insisted that he was guilty of the murder. But his story fell flat when he couldn't pick the victim, Elizabeth Short, out of a lineup of photographs. Children are sometimes put in incredibly tense situations and they don't always understand the consequences. When 16-year-old Felix was brought in for the 2005 shooting of Antonio Ramirez and questioned without a lawyer, he slowly went along with interrogators. He picked up pieces of what they said had happened and used those in his confession, even claiming to have left the gun at his grandfathers, though he didn't have a living grandfather. Studies have shown that children are more likely to give false confessions than adults. They are also more likely to think that going along with the interrogators will lead to them getting released, while maintaining innocence and disagreeing will lead to them getting jailed. Some people will go much farther to protect their loved ones than they will to protect themselves. The show trials conducted in the USSR under Stalin included many false confessions. Some were obtained through violence, but others involved threats against the families of those involved. Authorities would say that they were just as guilty as the accused individuals and could also be executed. Many people confessed to save their families from that fate. Floyd Brown spent 14 years paying for a murder he didn't commit. Why? In part because of a lengthy confession he supposedly had written, detailing how he had killed an 80-year-old woman in 1993, but his lawyers maintained that he only had the mental capacity of a 7-year-old and could only speak in two or three word phrases. He was put in a mental hospital to await trial but was left in purgatory for over a decade before he was released. A mentally handicapped have been shown to be vulnerable to producing false confessions. And finally, here's a reason to cut back on your drinking and drug use. False confessions are more likely to happen when someone is drunk or under the influence of drugs, but in many cases being drunk alone won't get you off the hook or get the confession thrown out. Thanks for listening. If you like the show, please share it with someone you know who loves the paranormal or strange stories, true crime, monsters or unsolved mysteries like you do. You can email me anytime with your questions or comments at darren at WeirdDarkness.com. Darren is D-A-R-R-E-N. And you can find me on Facebook, Twitter and more, including the show's Weirdos Facebook group on the Contact social page at WeirdDarkness.com. Also on the website, if you have a true paranormal or creepy tale to tell, click on Tell Your Story. All stories in Weird Darkness are purported to be true unless stated otherwise, and you can find source links or links to the authors in the show notes. All stories in this episode came from Ranker's unspeakable times. His Brendan Dassey innocent was written by Colleen Conroy. Kimberly's long struggle to prove her innocence is by Maggie Clancy. Why do the innocent confess is by Leah Rose Emory. Again, you can find links to all of those stories in the show notes. And now that we're coming out of the dark, I'll leave you with a little light. Proverbs 10 verse 19, When words are many, sin is not absent, but he who holds his tongue is wise. And a final thought, no one can change a person, but someone can be a person's reason to change. I'm Darren Marlar. Thanks for joining me in the Weird Darkness. Starring David Jansen, Barbara Rush and Bradford Dillman. After several locals are viciously murdered, a Louisiana sheriff starts to suspect he might be dealing with a werewolf. Our weirdo watch party is always free to watch online, so grab your popcorn, candy and soda and jump into the fun and even get involved in a live chat as we watch the movie. It's Moon of the Wolf on Saturday, March 2nd, hosted by Hexen Arcane. The show begins at 10pm Eastern, 9pm Central, 8pm Mountain and 7pm Pacific. You can watch a trailer for the film and watch horror hosts and schlocky B movies anytime, day or night on the Weirdo Watch Party page at WeirdDarkness.com. Hope to see you March 2nd. Our brain is a wonderful thing, allowing us to make decisions, work on problems, plan for the future, live for today and remember our past. But that last item, remembering our past, can sometimes be painful if we're stuck going back to those memories again and again, feeling shame for something we did or didn't do. How can we deal with our yesterdays? That's the topic of this week's message over at the Church of the Undead podcast, which you can get to by going to WeirdDarkness.com slash church. Things Strange in Macabre. If you want to listen to the podcast, you can find it at WeirdDarkness.com slash listen.