Not the Father

Last week, I shared a true crime that involved a sexual predator who added serial killer to his resume. If you missed that true crime, I’ll link it here: TROUBLED AND VISIOUS

One of the random killings the former realtor had claimed as his when he confessed to his crimes was four people murdered at a local store. He confessed he was the unknown person who walked into the store in the middle of the day and murdered the store owner, his mother (service manager), and two employees.

A resident of the town who frequented the store stopped by after the shooting had occurred. Understandably, he was distraught and called in the emergency.

Investigators typically start with those who are closest to the victim. Then they work their way out from the inner circle of connections. That would be the man who found the horrific scene and the wife of the business owner.

The victim’s wife lost her husband and mother-in-law at the same time. They were expecting a baby at the time of his death. Two days after he’d been with his wife for the ultrasound appointment, someone killed him.

Investigators quickly took a long-hard-look at the business owner’s pregnant wife. They wanted to know how their relationship was. She gave them cards and love letters she’d saved. They polygraphed her. And asked if she’d planned her husband’s murder—which she denied.

Days passed, then months, no answers to who had killed the entire crew at the business. The wife gave birth to their son—it was a bittersweet delivery. She grieved the loss of her husband, yet rejoiced in the birth of their son, whom she named after him.

When the baby was six months old, the police called. They didn’t have a suspect, but they wanted to talk with her alone. She was told not to bring the baby with her. When she arrived for the meeting, they told her they had taken a soiled diaper from her trash, and had it tested against her husband’s DNA—they didn’t match.

The investigator told her,

“Your husband is not the father of your baby.”

Outraged, she told them they were wrong—he was the baby’s father. She knew she’d never cheated on her husband. She demanded that they retest the baby, and that they swab the baby’s mouth while she was present. She also said she’d have her husband exhumed to get a sample from him.

They told her they had tested the DNA twice to be sure and turned up the heat, asking if she killed her husband or had someone do it for her. Continuing on the premise that the baby’s father was unknown, they wanted her to tell them who the father was.

Life was a challenge. The widow lost their business. She had no income. She had young children to care for. And now the police’s accusation that she’d had another man’s baby damaged her reputation. It felt like everyone in town judged her based on false rumors.

DNA doesn’t lie, right?! It does if you use the wrong DNA. Later, the police admitted they got it wrong. Someone had mislabeled the vile of blood they’d used to compare to the baby’s DNA. Even though the authorities now knew the baby was her husband’s the town gossip continued. To have a chance at a good life, she moved her family as far away as possible.

Fourteen years had passed with no answers of who killed the crew at the store. In an unrelated crime, when the police found the man who had abducted a couple in the same town as the unsolved murders, they learned that he’d also killed the store crew—he knew things that only the killer would’ve known.

Why did the man kill the crew at the store? His mother told the authorities that he’d been a customer and felt the staff had treated him badly.

The widow finally knew who had killed her husband. She couldn’t undo the damage to her rotation.

Source: CBS News

All data and information provided is for information and research purposes only and not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual. Appeals or overturned verdicts may have occurred in criminal cases since I researched them. All information is provided on an as-is basis.