MJ's Weekly True Crime News Digest
The Weekly True Crime In Real Time Blotter
Here’s your weekly true crime digest, straight from the streets and courtrooms—no fluff, just the stories that keep folks talking, arguing, and double-checking their locks. Let’s get into it.
Karen Read Trial: Murder or Miscarriage of Justice?
Dedham, Massachusetts. The Karen Read trial is the talk of the town and the internet. Read, a former finance pro, is accused of running over her boyfriend, Boston cop John O’Keefe, with her SUV. The courtroom’s been a powder keg: flirty texts between Read and an ATF agent, a medical examiner’s breakdown of O’Keefe’s skull fractures, and a defense team that’s not shy about pointing fingers at other cops. The public’s split—some see Read as a scapegoat, others as a cold-blooded killer. Every day brings a new twist, and nobody’s betting on a quick verdict. Fox News True Crime Newsletter
Bryan Kohberger: The Idaho College Murders
Back in the headlines is Bryan Kohberger, accused of killing four University of Idaho students in 2022. New reports say a car matching his was seen near the victims’ house several times before the murders. The judge is weighing whether a gag order was broken, and the defense wants new evidence admitted. Online sleuths dissect every detail, and the trial hasn’t even started. The appetite for updates is endless; the case is a magnet for armchair detectives. Fox News True Crime Newsletter
The Menendez Brothers: Old Case, New Drama
Erik and Lyle Menendez, infamous for the Beverly Hills murders of their parents, are back in court decades later, fighting for resentencing. The DAs call out their “deceit” and “narcissistic tendencies,” but the brothers own up to old lies. The public’s fascination never faded, and the chance of a new trial has reignited debates about justice, privilege, and family secrets. Fox News True Crime Newsletter
The Bakersfield 3: Mothers on a Mission
Bakersfield, California. Three young people—James Kulstad, Baylee Despot, and Micah Holsonbake—disappeared or were murdered within 34 days in 2018. Their mothers joined forces, uncovering connections the police missed. The new docuseries The Bakersfield 3: A Tale of Murder and Motherhood on Max digs into the investigation, showing how persistence and community can crack a case wide open. Dexerto roundup
A Deadly American Marriage: Netflix’s Latest Jaw-Dropper
Netflix’s A Deadly American Marriage is stirring up debate. The doc revisits the 2015 killing of Irishman Jason Corbett by his American wife, Molly Martens, and her retired FBI Special Agent father. Was it self-defense or something darker? The film features new interviews, including with the kids, and has sparked heated online arguments about domestic violence, justice, and memory. Forbes coverage
Unknown Serial Killers of America: Monsters in the Shadows
Oxygen’s new series, Unknown Serial Killers of America, is shining a light on murderers who never made the headlines but left a trail of devastation. The premiere focused on Carl “The Sunday Morning Slasher” Watts, suspected of over 100 murders. Upcoming episodes will cover William Suff, who targeted sex workers in California, and Daniel Conahan, linked to the “Hog Trail Murders” in Florida. The show’s gritty, first-hand accounts are sparking conversations about how many predators still fly under the radar. Oxygen's True Crime
Other Notable Developments
- Human remains found near Taylor Swift’s Rhode Island mansion have stoked serial killer fears and a media frenzy.
- The so-called “Casanova Killer” was executed decades after claiming to have killed over 70 people, closing a chapter on one of America’s most prolific murderers.
- In Hawaii, a doctor accused of trying to kill his wife while hiking was denied bail, rattling both locals and tourists.
Trends and True Crime Public Reaction
Streaming platforms are still driving a true crime boom, with new documentaries and series dropping every week. The public’s appetite is as strong as ever, with social media fueling debates, amateur sleuthing, and sometimes even new leads. Cases involving law enforcement as suspects or victims (like Karen Read) are especially polarizing, splitting public opinion down the middle.
Cold case solves are up, thanks to DNA tech and the persistence of victims’ families. The obsession with serial killers—both known and unknown—shows no sign of slowing down, with new docuseries and podcasts feeding the fire. I think I am going to be a pretty busy true crime writer.
Sources:
- Fox News True Crime Newsletter
- Dexerto roundup of new true crime docs
- Forbes: Netflix’s Best New True-Crime Doc
- Oxygen: Unknown Serial Killers of America
If you enjoy my writing, would you consider a $1.00 tip using the Vocal Media tipping link? Thank you!
About the Creator
MJonCrime
My 30-year law enforcement career fuels my interest in true crime writing. My writing extends my investigative mindset, offers comprehensive case overviews, and invites you, my readers, to engage in pursuing truth and resolution.
A Mother's Love Lost
It was December 30th, 1988, just two days before the New Year. Jack Dale Walker had convinced a coworker to drive him out to the trailer where his girlfriend lived. Hansel Norton, the co-worker, had known Jack for barely three full weeks. Hansel was trying to be a good friend to this new friend. So, Jack, was young, only 22 years old and appeared to be love sick for the girl who was the mother of his baby.
By Cassie Mooreabout 12 hours ago in Criminal
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 7 days ago in Criminal
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.