Episode 7: Stolen Treasure

Speaker 1 (00:02):

Who set up the booby trap that Mary found? I truly believe that Karen Freshour, Paul's ex-wife and Ron's sister, is responsible for that.

Speaker 2 (00:11):

Paul went through a divorce in which he was basically awarded everything. Custody of the children, retirement funds, the house.

Speaker 3 (00:19):

Freshour framed Paul. Or was involved in his framing at the very least. She may have used the letters as an opportunity to ruin Paul [crosstalk 00:00:29].

Speaker 4 (00:29):

[crosstalk 00:00:29] percent sold on the theory of Karen being the letter writer.

Speaker 3 (00:31):

[crosstalk 00:00:31] I think it's clear that she knows something, at least.

Speaker 4 (00:31):

But she felt wronged by Paul in the courts, and now Mary was running around on her brother. Karen had the opportunity to get back at Paul while exposing Mary as the cheater she was. Two birds, one stone. Everything about Karen just fits.

Speaker 5 (00:45):

After Paul and Freshour divorced, Karen started erecting signs around town. And eventually the boobie trap to frame Paul-

Group (00:54):

[crosstalk 00:00:54] Frame Freshour, Frame Freshour-

Speaker 7 (00:54):

Karen.

Speaker 5 (00:54):

... Remember, Paul got the house-

Group (00:56):

[crosstalk 00:00:56] Frame Freshour, Frame Freshour-

Speaker 5 (00:56):

... and the kids in the divorce, so Karen was bitter.

Group (00:58):

Frame Freshour, Frame Freshour.

Speaker 7 (00:59):

Karen Freshour.

Marie Mayhew (01:00):

For every story that has a hero, so too must it have a villain. And our story about the town of Circleville is no exception. If our hero, Paul Freshour, a personable, honest and likable guy, by numerous accounts, was really wrongfully accused and incarcerated, then who was the villain that put him there? Sheriff Radcliff and the Pickaway Sheriff's Office were, according to our hero, corrupt, inept and only interested in protecting their own. But in Paul's mind law enforcement were merely henchmen, just tools to be used at will by the person that truly had a vendetta against him. Who hated Paul Freshour enough to plan in the shadow for years to send him away for good?

Marie Mayhew (01:43):

Who was close enough to Paul, to Mary, to Ron and their children, to use them all like so many pieces on a chess board? What kind of sick person hates someone that much, that they would destroy anything in their path to see Paul in prison? To a lot of people that's easy, that person was close to Paul, knew him since they were young, loved him, married him, had a kid and wanted to raise a family with him. That sick, evil villain, well it has to be his wife. Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On this episode, meet the number one suspected favored villain in the Circleville story. The figure that many a true crime fan believes to be the letter writer, Karen Sue Freshour. Wife to Paul, sister to Ron and friend to Mary.

Marie Mayhew (02:38):

We'll look at the transcripts of the Freshour's 1983 contentious divorce and try and understand the woman that so many have come to believe was the one that framed Paul Freshour. But is she really our villain? Or is she, like Paul Freshour claimed to be, just being set up to be wrongfully accused? "In my 22 years as a journalist and investigator, I don't think I have ever met an individual so consumed with such irrational hatred for another and a willingness to say anything, no matter how provably false, to defame him." In his 1993 letter to the parole board on behalf of Paul Freshour, journalist and private investigator Martin Yant is definitely not holding back any punches when he describes Karen Sorrick. Or as she was known when all of this was going on, Karen Sue Freshour.

Marie Mayhew (03:33):

She married Paul in October of 1962. She was his wife during the Ohio Pen Riots in 1968. And together they had three children, Mark, Dawn Michelle and Helen Sienna. In October of 1982, the Freshour's filed for divorce. This is the event that is the supposed motivation for Karen Sue Freshour's framing of her soon to be ex-husband for attempted murder. With Paul out of the way, Karen supposedly would have all of the financial assets and full custody of their kids. Completely free to pursue a relationship with another man, John Sorrick. We're to believe that she was someone so ruthless and cold that she would try and murder her best friend just to see her ex-husband punished so she could have easy, unfettered access to his money.

Marie Mayhew (04:22):

For every virtue bestowed on Paul Freshour, the opposite has been projected onto his ex-wife. For as honest and forthright Paul was to the truth, Karen was a liar, and manipulative. Paul was church-going, devoted to his family and friends. Karen broke up families, cheated on her husband, was cruel and dismissive to her own children, was an alcoholic. Paul held steady jobs making good money in a management position at Anheuser-Busch, while Karen's behavior made her unemployable. You get the idea, because, well it's not really subtle, is it? It's black and white. We have our hero and we have our villain. This picture is what's painted for us over and over again. But what do we really know about Karen Sue Freshour, who like so many others involved in the Circleville story, has remained silent on this topic for years?

Marie Mayhew (05:13):

It is through the Freshour's divorce proceedings, the state's case against Paul Freshour for attempted murder and other court events that we're able to give some voice to this story's alleged villain. In interviewing witnesses after Paul Freshour's arrest for attempted murder, Sheriff's Detective Philip Brown spoke to many people about Karen Sue. One being Raymond Trainor, the security officer for the USTA where Karen worked. Trainor came from a law enforcement background, had testified on organized crime in front of congress, and was previously employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In his interviews with Detective Brown and his congressional testimony, Trainor comes across as regimented, discipled. When asked by congress if he believes that there was enough financial regulation in horse racing, he said, "When you talk security to a security man, I don't think that any one security man would say that anything is adequate. There's always room for an improvement." Why is it important to point out these details about Trainor, is because he is a witness to Karen Sue.

Marie Mayhew (06:20):

He worked with her and was in charge of security for the company. Trainor had told Detective Brown that Karen Sue had talked to him about her concerns about her husband and marriage. In the trunk of his car, Trainor had amassed multiple signs that were found posted on the lawn or the parking lot of the USTA office. These signs were saying disparaging things, to say the least, about Karen Sue. To avoid having her have to see them, Trainor would collect them and put them into the trunk of his car daily. He even drove home with a plywood one that read, "Peggy H. and Karen F. are lovers, they have no time for anyone else." The most recent sign that he had found was found a month earlier, in January 1983, in the early morning hours at about 6:00 AM. He told Detective Brown that the person who had found it was Peggy W. Heiznauer, Karen Sue's co-worker. And it said that Sue and Peggy were lesbians.

Marie Mayhew (07:12):

Karen had also told Trainor about a recent auto accident, where she was led to believe that her car was shot at and said the incident was reported to the Columbus Police Department. This must have struck Trainor as a surprising and disturbing event. After Karen told Trainor about it, he actually received a call from her then husband, Paul Freshour. Paul said that he had hired a private investigator, a Mark Anthony Giovanni, with Triple A Bureau of Investigation, to look into the shooting and wanted to come to the USTA office to speak with him more. Trainor agreed, and the meeting took place on February 3rd, 1983, a short time before his arrest. After hearing this from Trainor, Detective Brown looked at Karen Freshour's car there at her job without her knowledge. Especially at the trunk, and at the top of the trunk lid, where it was supposedly shot.

Marie Mayhew (08:01):

There was a dent, an indentation that could have been made by a bullet. But there was no bullet hole, and definitely no slug within the trunk. Trainor also told Detective Brown that Karen had told him she had found sealed envelopes at her home addressed with the seemingly block style handwriting as the anonymous letter writer. When she had asked Paul about them, he claimed he received them in the mail, and he did not wanna bother her with them. Karen said she did not know what happened to the letters, as Paul said that he would take care of it. On February 17th, 1983, the sheriff's office interviewed Karen Sue Freshour herself, directly. She confirmed that she had been married to Paul for over 20 years and both had filed for divorce in common plea court in Franklin County. She had custody of their oldest boy Mark, age about 19. And their two girls age 13 and 15, were with Paul.

Marie Mayhew (08:54):

When the sheriffs asked her more about the divorce proceedings she said that Paul's attorney was with Senator Schwartz-Walters firm in Columbus. We'll talk more about Paul's attorney in a coming episode. But what bears noting now is that Karen at that time, believed that she was going into divorce court and her husband was being backed by a seemingly affluent and very prestigious lawyer. Karen then recounts that for the first few years that they were married, Paul had beaten her up a few times. But then she stood up to him, filing for divorce, only later to decide to drop it. For a long period of time, about 17 years, there were few problems. Then, in the early 80s they began to argue. He accused her of running around with someone else. She told him that she thought he was sick, refusing to get into a car with him.

Marie Mayhew (09:41):

The City Police Department was called, and an investigation was made at the time. The police got her out of the house, and she spoke with a night prosecutor at the city prosecutor's office, but nothing further was done. Karen went on. She said that they had been separated for about seven months, she had left him about a week before the Fourth of July of 1982. Karen said that Paul had beaten her up in October, broke a soda bottle and held it to her face, threatening to cut her up so bad that her own mother wouldn't recognize her. This description matches the divorce proceedings.

Marie Mayhew (10:14):

From the report of the referral officer, the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County, "Upon consideration of matters before the court, the court referral officer makes the following finding of fact. Both parties were present with council on November 22, 1982. The parties have two children and the defendant alleges physical beating by her husband on October 5th, 1982 and showed pictures of a blackened eye with four stitches. The plaintiff has gone to counseling since the incident. The plaintiff went to counseling because he feels bad about what he did. The defendant claims the plaintiff has a violent temper and she left because of being struck."

Marie Mayhew (10:52):

Regarding the incident with her car, Karen told Detective Brown, Paul said he had hired a detective who reportedly found that the dent in her trunk was indeed a bullet hole. And that Paul was being set up, but for what we are not exactly sure. Especially since law enforcement knew that there was no slug in the trunk of Karen's car. When asked what she thought of her ex-husband, Paul Freshour, Karen said that he was smart. He could tell her things that could change her mind, to get her to think in a certain way. But she also thought that he was irrational, and that if you disagreed with him, he didn't like it. And he believed that he was always right. He would come across as very nice at first, but if anyone disagreed with him he would become very angry. In all of the court cases and documentation that I've found, Karen Sue is consistent about how she describes Paul Freshour.

Marie Mayhew (11:40):

He's smart, very intelligent. He can influence people to think a certain way or believe something without making you feel like you're being coerced. He comes across as very down to earth and very likable. Before they started having problems that lead to their divorce, Karen Sue did all of the finances and kept all of their records, bank statements, mortgages. When she split up she had to go back and show Paul what was going on and what to do. Paul never kept much money with him, only two to five dollars a day. Because of Karen's knowledge with finances, she found that not only was Paul not paying her the court settled and mandated monthly alimony payments of $300 a month, but he had also not disclosed or split stock from the company that he worked for, Anheuser-Busch, which was another ruling of the court.

Marie Mayhew (12:30):

Karen said Paul had thought a great deal of Ron and Mary Gillispie before Ron died. But after his death, Paul grew to hate Mary. Hated her over the Massie deal, and used to discuss it quite a bit. Saying things like, "Why don't they just go out of state?" Or calling her, "A goddamn slut who slept with Massie." But Karen Sue believed that before Ron died, Mary had nothing to do with Massie whatsoever. Mary told Karen that Mr. Massie impressed her, and she had told her husband that there was nothing going on between them. In fact, both Ron and Karen told Paul this, that there was nothing going on. There was no affair. If Karen and Ron, Mary's husband, believed this to be the truth, that there wasn't an affair, then why couldn't Paul Freshour? What could of possibly mattered to him so much that he would not only take the word of his ex-wife, but of Ron Gillispie, someone that Paul'd admired and viewed as a close friend?

Marie Mayhew (13:26):

When Detective Brown asked her about their children she said her son Mark, the oldest, was very afraid of Paul. And that was why he was living with her. Where this fear of his father comes from is only hinted at in the documents. Karen tells Detective Brown that Mark told her one time his father called him at home, saying that he was in possession of a shotgun that was used in a felony and that he had to get rid of it. Paul told Mark things like, "This was the night she was going to get her head blown off." Referring to Mary Gillispie. Karen said the girls and Mark had also been getting letters at home since she had left Paul, but her daughters were also getting calls at Paul's home on Chandler drive. All they would tell her was that it was sick stuff, and they refused to go into any details. Paul had been seeing a psychiatrist in family counseling with their two girls. Karen had gone once as well but was shocked to find out that the psychiatrist knew nothing of their son, Mark. Paul had never mentioned that he had a son.

Marie Mayhew (14:26):

When they started to talk about the anonymous letters, Karen told Detective Brown that about two summers ago while house cleaning, she had found a letter hidden between the mattress and the box spring of their bed. The letter was addressed to Anheuser-Busch in St. Louis, Missouri and the writing had the same look as some of the other ones that had been sent to Mary. When she asked Paul about this, he told her that he had written the letter as a work reference for someone. When she checked the next day, the letter was gone. She had also found a letter in the toilet. Her son had gotten it out with a coat hanger after the toilet had stopped up. She told Detective Brown that it had been addressed to some church in a nearby town but didn't have a stamp on it. Karen had tried to piece it together when Paul was not at home.

Marie Mayhew (15:11):

She said she could make out the name Gillispie on the letter. She often found envelopes like this left in odd places in the Freshour home, where she could make out the name Gillispie written on the letter inside. Karen went on to say the night prior to his fatal accident, Ron Gillispie called Mary before she and Karen Sue had left for their trip for Florida. And told his wife he thought he had the matter "figured out". Karen said a short time after Ron had died she had found four letters in white envelopes in the trunk of her husband's car. They had not been mailed and Paul had told her that Ron wanted him to mail them, but strangely enough even though they had stamps on them, they had not been mailed. Karen ended the interview with Detective Brown by talking about what she told Mary Gillispie. She said that, yes, she did believe that Paul was behind the letters and she did tell Mary Gillispie that.

Marie Mayhew (16:08):

The Freshour's divorce that started in 1982 was contentious. Both parties claimed the other was guilty of gross neglect, and then filed restrained orders that prohibited the other from coming in contact, from taking any action with their physical property or with their bank accounts. Karen Sue even had accused Paul of being physically abusive. On May 9th of 1983, the judge in the case ruled the following, "This cause came for trial upon the plaintiff's complaint of divorce on May 9th, 1983. The court heard testimony offered by the plaintiff and his witness. And defense offered no testimony. Therefore, the court finds the defendant in default for failure to answer to give evidence to support an answer and thus finds the allegation of the plaintiff's complaint to be true. The court finds the defendant has been guilty of gross neglect of duty of which was supported by independent corroborative testimony. The plaintiff is therefore entitled to a divorce as put forth in his complaint."

Marie Mayhew (17:08):

Because Karen Sue did not refute these claims or provide an alternative, the court found the allegation of the plaintiff's complaint to be true and ruled against her. Paul Freshour won custody of their two daughters and was ordered to pay an alimony of $300 a month to Karen Sue. Their shared real estate was also to be sold and split. All of the stocks and bonds from the plaintiff, or Paul's, job at Anheuser-Busch were to be split equally. So why did Karen Sue, the defendant in this case, seemingly not defend herself? Have rebuttal for the plaintiff's witness? Or, if her master plan was to frame Paul Freshour as the anonymous letter writer, even if she suspected him to be so, why not use this as her defense?

Marie Mayhew (17:52):

Even before the court's ruling for the plaintiff, Paul Freshour was a suspect. He was charged on February 28th. He was released from the Pickaway County Jail on a $50,000 bond a month later on March 30th. At any point Karen Sue could have used any of this information. The articles in the newspaper, witnesses like Raymond Trainor, but she didn't do it, so why not? What in the world would stop her? During the divorce proceedings, Paul Freshour called a witness. There is no mention that I can locate specifically who it was, but because he was awarded custody, it is a reasonable assumption that the witness was one of their two daughters. Besides that witnesses testimony, their children possibly would have been present at trial. They very certainly would have heard about it in some regard. Just like they would have been very aware of all of the media attention around their father being arrested as the letter writer and trying to murder their aunt.

Marie Mayhew (18:48):

Maybe the reason Karen Sue Freshour didn't defend herself was because she made a decision that it was more important to try and defend her children. She recognized that there would be no winning, no gaining emotionally or financially from bringing the letters into their divorce. Karen Sue did not want for her children to hate their father. She saw what was coming, the stories in the newspaper, the attention, the gossip. And she didn't wanna put her children in front of that. Even if on the witness stand one of her daughters said something against her. Even if not hating him meant her daughter would end up hating her instead. What Karen Sue told others like Trainor and Detective Brown shows a more measured restraint in describing her ex-husband than what we've been led to believe. She says that he was abusive, and she believes that he is the letter writer, but she does not seem to take the opportunity to put the proverbial nail in his coffin. She could have. She could have gone to the press, called him a monster or told the judge presiding over her divorce proceedings that he was crazy and that he was dangerous. But she didn't.

Marie Mayhew (19:53):

How do we know this? Because if she had, there would have been a record of it entered into her divorce proceedings. She did not even appear to defend herself against Paul Freshour, who actually did take the opportunity to defame her character. From a September 6th, 1983 letter to the court referee who was involved in his divorce proceedings.

Paul Freshour (20:14):

Dear Court Referee, my name is Paul Freshour and I'm in Pickaway County Jail on an attempted murder charge. Still, I'm asking that my children's interest remains first. I was granted a divorce from my wife a year ago and was granted custody of my two children. Please take this into consideration. My wife walked out on me and these girls over a year ago. She has done this before. If they wanna be with their mother, I'm glad, but please set up where they are taken care of. I want for them what they want, before any investigation is completed, before my hearing be, please ask them the following. Ask both children if their mother hasn't threatened to phone them into a home of some type. Ask them about their mother carrying a gun like a lot of her friends. My ex-wife has tried to kill herself on four different occasions by cutting her wrists, trying to crash a car at 60 miles an hour, and trying to drown herself. Just ask them if their mother hasn't a loaded gun around the house.

Marie Mayhew (21:17):

Or in a letter to his attorney while he was being held in jail before his trial.

Paul Freshour (21:22):

March 3rd, 1983. Skip, did Millie ever tell you what started last summer? Sue left me because of the house being dirty and me not making the girls clean. She lived with Peg for a week and then with Carol. She even stayed some at the cabin, but I didn't run after her. Ask the girls, for they won't lie. The weekend she came home I had just received one of these letters myself, giving me orders. (laughs) I just laughed and threw it in the toilet. The drains got all plugged up, and it took Mark two hours to unplug it. Sue came home and took the letter from the toilet and tried to read it. Since I was in bed and didn't kiss her butt, she said that I wrote it. She told the girls and then she told all of her friends.

Paul Freshour (22:05):

Sandy told her to come back and talk to me about it, so she did. I lost my temper and told her, "Hell yes, if you think so." We argued and she left. I threw her clothes out when she finally came home, but I wouldn't stop watching football to even talk to her. She hasn't been right since. I get in trouble every time I try to help her. She told me about the sign at her job, so I hired a private investigator to find out who did it. That's when I went into the building and saw it. She got so mad because I hired him. I think that she told Mary, and Mary told the sheriff, who in turn has talked to Sue. He sounded just like her when he told me why he thought everyone was writing the letters. He made me sick, he sounded so much like her. It sounded like a recording coming right out of his mouth.

Marie Mayhew (22:52):

In these letters that Paul Freshour wrote to his lawyer, to the divorce court, and even one to the Columbia Dispatch, he does not appear to afford Karen Sue any of the same consideration. He writes to the court that she tried to commit suicide four times without even giving his wife of 20 years the chance to know that he made these claims or to defend herself. So what about when Paul does communicate directly with Karen Sue during this same time period? From a letter from the Pickaway County Jail, from Paul to Karen Sue.

Paul Freshour (23:24):

Sue, how you doing? Gary, a cell mate of mine, dropped the dime on you today. He said that he called you and that you thought he was a hit-man. Are you for real? He said that you told him that I was always taking large amounts of money from the bank or borrowing it. He said that you told him about someone shooting at you, and about Ronnie, and about everything. Please, think about this. We must watch who we talk to. Someone is already taking advantage of what they know about our problems. Who's trying to destroy our relationship? Don't ever think I want you hurt. Why do you think I'm fighting this so hard with everything I got? God knows that I loved Ronnie and that he loved me. And I had nothing to do with his death.

Paul Freshour (24:05):

Pray about it and God will enlighten you. You once said that I was the letter writer, but I'm very innocent. I can tell you things you told someone about your job and that you didn't tell me. I'm gonna prove it to you once and for all that I'm not the letter writer. I did some things I shouldn't, but it was for good reason.

Marie Mayhew (24:23):

So maybe some of you listening will hear this and discount it as overly sentimental and maybe even biased on my account. Okay, but I think it's reasonable to say that it is a very unusual event to have a stranger, who is incarcerated, call your ex-wife and have a positive motivation in mind. Never mind telling her you know who she's been talking to, and that you have nothing to with her brother's death, all while being in jail for attempted murder. And then to ask her who destroyed your friendship. Sure, he did some things he shouldn't, but it was all for a good reason. While there are some inconsistencies with Karen Sue, loving her kids does not appear to be one of them. In all of the written reports, testimony, and correspondences available to me during my research, Karen Sue Freshour is far from perfect. But she loves her kids.

Marie Mayhew (25:15):

In a correspondence with Martin Yant she said, "Believe me, I lost a lot. You know, I could have done a whole lot more. I could have really, really portrayed this man to be what he really was, and gotten a lot more, but I couldn't for the fact that I have kids. And believe me, that's what I'm trying to tell you. I love my kids a whole hell of a lot more than you'll ever know." In the stories we tell each other, we love to have heroes and villains. We crave being able to have that certainty, even if it comes at the expense of those who we cast into those roles. It's comforting knowing that while our hero has been wrongfully accused, he's a good guy. And that what's happened to him has been orchestrated by another, someone vengeful and cold.

Marie Mayhew (26:08):

For our story to resolve, the hero must be vindicated. And the villain defeated, relegated to only being remembered as such. But what happens to the story of the Circleville letter writer if our villain isn't as bad as we want her to be? What if she is just another person going through life? If Karen Sue Freshour is not as bad as we thought, then what does that say about our hero? The man wrongfully accused, telling us this story. Author William Congreve famously once wrote, "Hell hath no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman's scorn." Which if you believe Paul Freshour and his story of Circleville, does neatly sum up the character of Karen Sue.

Marie Mayhew (26:52):

I would ask you to instead consider a different quote by the same author. While it is not as well known or popular, it may closely more resemble the truth, "He that first cries out stop thief, is often he that has stolen the treasure." Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew (singing). Next time we look at what happens when Mary Gillispie, fed up from years of harassment to her and her family, finally tears down a sign from the anonymous letter writer. The awful words on the outside of the sign are all too familiar to her, but what she finds inside the sign, well, that's something she hadn't bargained for. The boobie trap is our next episode.

Marie Mayhew (27:44):

(singing)

Marie Mayhew (27:50):

Hey, wanna know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @whateverremains or online at whateverremainspodcast.com (singing). Be sure to subscribe to the show and give us a five star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Your reviews to help others to find the show and we adore hearing from our listeners, so please reach out. Our intro music is by group Rhoda. The closing song for Circleville is performed by Ed Grabianowski, produced by Rich Root. The all seeing eye, or our logo, is by the super talented Desdemona. This has been a copyright Five Orange Pips production. All rights reserved.

Episode 6: Half Gallon of Gasoline & 40 Ounces of Lighter Fluid

Marie (00:01):

Well hi there dear listeners. It's your host, Marie Mayhew. Just wanted to pop in and say long time no podcast. Yes, I know, it's been a while since we've had a new episode. But I think like so many of you listening, this pandemic thing has taken a lot out of me. Um, I hope that every single one of you listening is doing well and keeping mentally sane, and keeping a sense of humor during this time. Uh, I wanted to especially thank every one of you who's reached out on Twitter, uh, and said something encouraging, and I would like to share those encouraging words back to you.

Marie (00:45):

I know that this is extremely difficult being locked in, in quarantine, with, with uh, fires and murder hornets and COVID-19. But I am confident that something good, at least being able to go outside, is right around the corner.

Marie (01:09):

I wanna especially thank [00:01:12 @YesteryearRains] on Twitter for sending some very encouraging words. Thank you.

Marie (01:20):

Hopefully, now, in late August, I'm getting some research creative juices back and we'll get back on a more regular schedule. Uh, until then, I hope everyone is well. Take care of each other, and all my love.

Marie (01:35):

And now, your new episode. (silence)

Marie (01:58):

On August 19th, 1977, Ron Gillespie receives a telephone call. It is late at night and Ron is home alone. He has been drinking, and in his impaired judgment he makes a rash and fatal decision. Grabbing his keys, Ron leaves his home and drives off, presumably to confront the person who has been making his family's life miserable for over a year.

Marie (02:19):

Ten minutes into his trip, on a dark, rural highway, Ron misses a curve in the road and his pickup slams head first into a tree, killing him instantly. For a brief period of time after Ron Gillespie's fatal accident in 1977, the anonymous letters stop arriving in the mailboxes of Circleville, Ohio. One seemingly possible answer was that after Ron Gillespie's life ended that night on Five Points Pike, the Circleville letter writer believed that their work was complete. Their cruel letters had inflicted as much harm as possible on Mary Gillespie and her family. But what if it was very much the opposite, and the Circleville letter writer did not mean to be the reason the Gillespies' pickup truck collided. They never wanted to see Ron Gillespie harmed, and certainly not be the cause of his death.

Marie (03:05):

Maybe after learning of Ron's death that night on Five Points Pike, the letter writer was flooded with loathing and guilt. They did not realize the sickening extent of power their words had on the Gillespie family, at least not until that very moment. This unforeseen event that left behind Ron's wife, children, his sister and his brother in law shocked the seemingly omnipresent letter writer to such an extent that they simply set down their pen in disbelief.

Marie (03:34):

That kind of stark realization would for many people mark a turning point. The actions of the Cirlceville letter writer, it had gone too far. Someone, possibly someone the letter writer themselves cared about, was now dead. But the letter writer did not reach this conclusion. Instead, Gillespie's death channeled their loathing and guilt into a rage and indignation with one man becoming their newest focus. Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe.

Marie (04:00):

In later 1977, letter after letter accused Sheriff Radcliffe of ignoring or even covering up the supposed murder of Ron Gillespie. Of cronyism, corruption. The letter writer was determined to prove that just like the superintendent, Gordon [Massey 00:04:15], before him, Sheriff Ron Gillespie was a tyrant, a predator, and a threat to the town of Circleville.

Marie (04:22):

The same night as the accident on Five Points Pike, it was Sheriff Radcliffe himself who identified Gillespie's body for the coroner, and then took the responsibility on notifying his family of the tragedy. A sheriff for decades, Radcliffe himself seemingly made a point on knowing the people of the town he served and protected. He once told the Columbus dispatch ...

Sheriff Radcliffe (04:44):

I know people. If you don't lie to them, they'll take care of you. Treat people how you'd like to be treated yourself.

Marie (04:50):

In the small, seemingly close knit town of Cirlceville, Ohio, how could Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe even have imagined the extremes that this one individual would go to, to prove him dead wrong.

Marie (05:08):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains Podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On this episode, the aftermath of Ron Gillespie's death set the Circleville letter writer on their own collision course with law enforcement, and in particular with Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe. We also look at a strange coincidence from a decade earlier that shows us a different side of Paul Freshour , the man who Radcliffe would later accuse of being the letter writer.

Marie (05:38):

Late on the night of August 19th, 1977, after Ron Gillespie was pronounced dead on arrival at Berger Hospital, and after identifying his body, Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe drove to the home of Ron Gillespie's mother and father to break the news to them of their son's death. This night would also mark the first time that Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe would meet Paul Freshour , the man he would six years later arrest for the attempted murder of Ron Gillespie's wife, Mary. The Sheriff recalls that meeting in the trial transcript.

Sheriff Radcliffe (06:09):

Paul Freshour tells me, and I won't disagree with him, that he talked to me the night, or early morning, of August 19th, 1977, when I was at the Gillespie home. I believe David Gillespie's home, the father and mother of Ron Gillespie, who lived in Mullenberg Township, Pickaway County, Ohio, for the purpose of to indicate that Mr. Ron Gillespie had been killed in an automobile accident. He indicated to me that I either talked with him over the telephone or he came to the residence while I was still there, I made, when I made notification the family of the death of Ron Gillespie.

Marie (06:44):

In later writings, however, Paul Freshour remembers his initial meeting with the Sheriff in a very different light.

Paul Freshour (06:52):

The Sheriff called me at work at the time of Ron's death. I was working the 3:00 to 11:00 shift, and another supervisor relieved me from my work. I went straight to Sheriff Radcliffe's office. The Sheriff told me that Ron was drunk and speeding, but like me, Ron was not a drinker. I didn't buy it. I let the Sheriff know that he might have been able to prevent Ron's death if he had worked harder on solving the letter investigation. I felt that he coulda done more on that particular case. Everybody felt this way when Ron died. The Sheriff has had a strong dislike to me ever since. I guess he thought I was challenging his authority or pressuring him too hard to solve the case, but I was upset about Ron's death and I wanted him to look into some possibilities other than drunk driving. I wasn't the only one making these assumptions at the time about Ron's death. Keep in mind, Ron's death was foretold in the letters.

Marie (07:43):

Their first meeting in August 1977 would mark the beginning of a prolonged and bitter quarrel Freshour would have with the Sheriff and with law enforcement in Ohio in general. He would later recount to journalists that he blamed Radcliffe for the death of his brother in law, and his accusations quickly escalated into gross neglect and corruption.

Marie (08:03):

Paul Freshour 's mistrust and even sometimes open contempt of Ohio law enforcement plays a significant role in the overall story of the Cirlceville letter writer. Repeatedly in interviews and testimony, Freshour blames the Sheriff for not capturing the letter writer, for ignoring his and Gillespie's pleas for help, and for Ron's death. Underneath this litany of accusations one thing that appears to really bother Freshour is that he felt excluded from the investigation of his brother in law's accident. Constantly he reiterates the same line of logic. He knew more about Ron than the sheriff, or anyone for that matter. He was smarter and better connected than law enforcement, but they wouldn't listen to him, and they treated him like an outsider when all he really wanted to do was help.

Marie (08:47):

Freshour seemingly falls into this strange cycle over and over. He doesn't trust the sheriff but at the same time he tries to convince him that Ron's death was a murder. He dismisses the sheriff's findings and thinks he's corrupt, but still wants him to listen. Freshour 's attitude regarding the authority of the Circleville Sheriff's Office is worth looking at, since less than a decade earlier Paul himself worked in law enforcement as a prison guard at the now infamous Ohio State Penitentiary.

Marie (09:24):

Ohio Pen is historically referenced as a particularly brutal institution. A dreadful, almost medieval place. It had been constructed on Spring Street, on the edge of downtown, in 1834, and the same structure was still in operation more than a 130 years later. The penitentiary had gone through a massive upheaval in the late summer of 1968. A series of fires and prisoner riots in June brought Ohio Pen under intense media scrutiny and public criticism. Damages to the facility kept prisoners in their cells for 24 hours a day. Ohio Pen was notoriously understaffed, as prison guard jobs were low paying and dangerous.

Marie (10:03):

The warden at this time, Ernest Maxwell, called the prison a monstrosity, saying the 2750 men were jammed into a facility that was only intended to accommodate 1800. Maxwell, the warden through the early June riots said, "You're bound to have an explosion when you are sitting on a powder keg." Soon after the early June riots, Maxwell himself was hospitalized with extreme exhaustion, and Ohio Pen needed a new warden.

Marie (10:32):

In 1968, Ohio and America itself was going through a time of great unrest. Anti war and civil rights activism was challenging the American identity. Both Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. had been assassinated. The shooting of student protesters at Kent State University in Ohio was only six months in the future. The idea of prison reform was not a frequent discussion point, or a national priority, but the Ohio state government recognized that these smaller outcroppings of riots could lead to bigger problems as the summer wore on.

Marie (11:08):

In early July, state government personnel openly acknowledged that there had not been enough applicants for prison guards, and they aggressively began to look for men to work at Ohio Pen. With more than 50 openings for correction officers alone, the prison was operating at well below its authorized strength. By August, the prison guard force was finally up to its authorized level of 313 guards. The state compensatory board authorized a monthly hazard duty pay raise. The other notable change was a new warden was appointed. As Maxwell was recuperating from his severe exhaustion in the local Riverside Hospital, [00:11:45 Marion Koloski], who had been serving as a superintendent of a local reformatory, took over for him.

Marie (11:50):

The new warden was a trained psychologist who had worked in corrections before. He also seemingly viewed the incarcerated very differently than his predecessor. He said while at other correctional institutions he observed that, "Many inmates have as much goodness in them as they do bad qualities. They need help. My philosophy is to distinguish between the inmates who want to help themselves and those who just want to wallow in their own self pity."

Marie (12:14):

At some point during the time of transition, Paul Freshour was hired as a prison guard at Ohio Pen. It would've been after the initial riots and fires on June 24th, but prior to the new warden starting his role on August 1st. Freshour was an army veteran and a graduate of Franklin University. He had the physical training and education to be considered a strong candidate for this position. Also with Freshour , three new guards were hired in the same time period.

Marie (12:44):

As we mentioned, there was a stark difference between the old warden, Ernest Maxwell, and his new replacement, [00:12:50 Marion Koloski], that in many ways reflected the changing social attitudes of the late 1960s. Warden Maxwell's penitentiary was punitive. Prisoners largely did not have any or many civil rights and were kept isolated from the outside world. With Warden Koloski, you can begin to see a shift towards prison rehabilitation. The prisons have some responsibility to be humane to the men and women that are serving time there.

Marie (13:23):

On August 20th, only six weeks after Warden Koloski started at Ohio Pen, there was a major prison riot. Inmates in two cell blocks took 11 guards prisoner and held them hostage for over 30 hours. Three of the nine prison guards taken hostage were new, hired after the June 24th riots, and one of these three guards was Paul Freshour . The story of the 1968 Ohio Pen riot is fascinating and deserves its own episode, but for the sake of the Circleville story, we'll focus on the key highlights. The inmates quickly delivered a list of demands to their new warden. These demands called for certain guards to be fired for abuses of power, amnesty for the rioters, and a chance for the prisoners to represent their case to the media.

Marie (14:09):

In a seemingly rare move for the time, Warden Koloski allowed the prisoners to speak with media members, but he quickly ended the news conference when violence erupted amongst the rioters. The Ohio Highway Patrol National Guardsman, and the Columbus Police, planned a rescue attempt for August 20th if the prison was not finally brought back under control. Unfortunately, before law enforcement could finalize a plan, one inmate stabbed another inmate, and this escalation prompted law enforcement to act immediately.

Marie (14:38):

There's a firsthand account of this in an article with retired Captain Jay Duval from March 2008. He recalls the violent outbreak.

Captain Jay Duval (14:48):

We had three or four days that they held the hostages. Finally we came in one morning and Colonel [Kieromonte 00:14:55] told Warden Koloski, "I'm taking over. We've been putting up with your stuff long enough."

Captain Jay Duval (15:02):

It was true. The warden didn't know what to do. He'd sit behind his desk and wring his hands, and he wouldn't make any decisions. General Del Corso, commander of the National Guard, was there, and I decided on blowing a hole in the roof and in the wall at the same time. About a half a dozen of us were standing in there when they set off the charges, and those old pictures that you see where, especially in cartoons, in an explosion, where the building raises up and settles back down? That's just what it reminded me of.

Captain Jay Duval (15:36):

Officers decided to move in. The approach consisted of two simultaneous explosions. One on the roof near the top floor, where the hostages were, and one in a side wall. Both blasts stunned rioters and allowed access to the inside. When the smoke cleared, five inmates were dead and another nine injured.

Marie (15:59):

This account shows a clear difference of how law enforcement wanted to react to this event. It's also a relatively unflattering portrait of Warden Koloski, that he was paralyzed by indecision and failed to act. At the time, when reporters asked for his thoughts about being criticized on not acting more quickly to crack down on the inmates when the August riot broke out, Koloski told him unequivocally, "The reason we spend so much time talking to prisoners is because human lives are at stake."

Marie (16:29):

After the riot ended and the smoke cleared, troubling accounts began to surface about the cause of the riot itself. A month later, the Dayton Daily News ran a series of articles about the riots. This series of articles opened by making the claim that the guards themselves had started the riot. It continued with, "Certain prison guards provided weapons, narcotics, and helped incite the deadly August Ohio Penitentiary Riot." Four guards had been identified by name to the newspaper, and others may be involved.

Marie (17:02):

According to witnesses, the reason for the guards' complicity was a dramatic attempt to get rid of Warden Koloski, who had not been well liked by the guards. One guard, whose name was one of the four who allegedly helped incite the riots, said, "One of the things wrong with Koloski was this. He wanted to bargain with the inmates. Under him, morale hit rock bottom. We guards felt like we were supposed to just be servants to the inmates rather than to the public. He was just very determined to have his own way, and that is that."

Marie (17:32):

Warden Koloski did resign shortly after the August riots. A deeply unenviable position that he never wanted to begin with. He told the Dayton Daily News that he had learned that he was appointed to the role while driving in his car listening to the radio.

Warden Koloski (17:48):

I felt peaceful and happy, driving back to my office in Columbus, when I switched on the car radio and heard my name on the news. They were announcing that I was named acting warden at Ohio Penitentiary by Governor James Rhodes. I was moving into a hot bed and I didn't have a choice. If they'd given me one I'd have turned them down.

Marie (18:09):

It's also true that in his very short employment of only 48 days as warden of Ohio Pen, he cleaned house. 60 guards resigned and 17 were fired, for a grand total of 1/4 of the entire guard workforce. It is also well documented that the warden was not well liked by the prison guards, namely because he had the perception that he favored the inmates. What's more probable is that Warden Koloski cracked down on possible abuse and corruption within the prison administration itself. He caught and fired guards that were dealing drugs or abusing inmates. This house cleaning was probably necessary, but would ultimately leave him with less prison guards than when he was appointed to the position, an already dangerously low number. But was it possible that an already limited group of guards not only incited the inmates to riot but also gave them weapons and drugs to get rid of a warden that had only been there for little under a month?

Marie (19:03):

At the time, Harold [Smothe 00:19:04], a corrections office and spokesman for the guards, said, "The guards were very anti Koloski. There is no doubt about it. As to the charge that some of them might've furnished weapons or narcotics, or helped incite that riot, I don't know about that. The charge comes as a shock to me, but then I don't know every single guard and what he is thinking or doing."

Marie (19:23):

What was Paul Freshour 's recollection of this event? He was one of the nine guards that was held hostage during the riot. And how does it compare with his fellow captives? By piecing together some firsthand accounts, we're able to get a better picture of what happened with Paul Freshour and the other guards during that time.

Marie (19:41):

Ohio Pen guard Paul Davis began work on August 12th in the AM shift and was speaking to Steve Huffman, one of the newer guards just hired. Davis told Huffman that his mother had just been released from the hospital after suffering a heart attack. Steve Huffman in turn volunteered that his young son had heart trouble and was soon to undergo an operation. "It was just a normal day," said Huffman, "No tension was in the air."

Marie (20:05):

"I could hear a prisoner whistling," said Davis. "Everything was routine until two minutes after 10:00."

Marie (20:11):

Paul Freshour himself explained, "I looked down the cell block area about the 14th range on the B block. I saw two inmates beating a guard named Miller. I just thought it was two or three inmates getting out of hand. I didn't dream it was the inmates taking over."

Marie (20:26):

After Steve Huffman was done talking with Paul Davis, he began to check on a range of cells when he heard a noise. He looked down the hallway and saw that an inmate with keys was unlocking cells. Another inmate was holding a sharpened utensil at the stomach of Don [Dilly 00:20:42], another guard, to get him to surrender his keys for additional cells. "When I saw this, I ran to help the guards. But an inmate grabbed me from behind and told me to stay where I was. Right about then, a large group of men, about 10 or so, started to come down into the cell block area. I knew it was useless to resist by now, that I was going to be taken hostage."

Marie (21:04):

"They came over the wall," said Paul Davis, "and put a knife to my side and said, 'Keep walking.' So I did. One grabbed my keys and began to unlock the cells. It was all mass confusion by now and nobody knew what was going on, or what anyone was really doing. I was dead sick and frightened, and I thought to myself, this is it. I'm going to die."

Marie (21:22):

Huffman was able to alert the rest of the prison. "There was a little door where we put mail through," he explains. "I knew it was dangerous to try anything, but I bent over and called through the hole to tell a guard I saw on the other side that prisoners were taking over. I took the chance. But I told them that they had the control over C and D."

Marie (21:40):

The inmate who Huffman saw confronting the other guard, Don [Dilly 00:21:44], was John Howard [Conde 00:21:46], who would later be identified as one of the ringmasters of the riot. He told Don Dilly to play it cool, and when another inmate threatened Dilly because the guard wasn't cooperative, Conde calmed him down by saying, "We don't want any violence." In fact, Don Dilly later told Ohio Highway Patrol investigators that Conde, "kept us all from getting killed," even fighting off other inmates who threatened to harm the seven guards taken hostage during the nearly 30 hour ordeal. Conde himself knew that the guards as hostages were their only leverage. For most every count of this grim event it seems like his goal was only to air grievances about the conditions of the prison to the public.

Marie (22:28):

After the negotiations started, the hostage guards were separated. Seven of them were taken to the top tier, to cell 6B. Huffman recalls, "They put Hickman and me in one cell at the very end, and there was a vacant cell with lighter fluid and a jar of gasoline in the middle. The ringleader of the inmates came to the cell and threatened us. He took some lighter fluid and poured a patch in front of the cell on the floor. He set fire to it and said, 'This is what's going to happen if you don't cooperate with us and we don't get what we want.'"

Marie (22:57):

Davis recalled, "They kept me isolated. They pretty much ignored me. But they did bring me some cigarettes and a cup of tea. At about noon I got a couple sandwiches. One minute someone would whisper it was all a big bluff and not to worry, and then just a few minutes later someone else would come by and scream that we were all going to die." This played out over the 30 hours the guards were held captive. They were threatened to be decapitated or burned alive one minute, and then treated kindly the next. Interestingly, the strangest story from this time of their captivity comes from Paul Freshour himself.

Paul Freshour (23:32):

This guy with a guitar came up to the L level and sat and talked to us about the time the sun went down. He was really friendly and he said that he would see to it to the end that no harm came to us. He said that many of the prisoners on the block didn't want any part in what was going on. He sang a little song that he made up, a song about prison life. It was sad. There were some tears in some of those guys' eyes.

Marie (23:57):

Freshour continues his account after law enforcement charged the prisons to rescue the hostages and in the process killed five inmates.

Paul Freshour (24:04):

I felt sorry for some of the prisoners. Here they are, some of them really big guys. You know, tough guys. Big and mean, acting so big and brave. Here they were begging for their lives.

Marie (24:17):

But what about the accusations that guards themselves were accountable for the riot? The warden appointed after the riots, Harold [Carewell 00:24:26], called the allegations preposterous, said that the guards were way too loyal to the institution to be instigators. But still, the news report said that some guards did supply the inmates with weapons and narcotics all in very dramatic attempt to get rid of Koloski.

Marie (24:42):

The original story comes from a series of articles written by two journalists for the Dayton Daily News, Dale Huffman and John [McMillan 00:24:50]. The days following the riot, the Daily ran front page exposes for over a week. The first article provided a firsthand account of the riot, interviewed witnesses, law enforcement, but also cast a more critical eye on the events. Questions were raised about the living conditions for the inmates and the excessive force used to bring the riot to the end.

Marie (25:12):

A 31 year old African American man named Edward [Spaulding 00:25:16] was serving time in the Ohio Penitentiary for his role in an armed robbery in 1962. During the riot, Spaulding stood at a broken window and yelled out to his mother and brother, who were standing in the crowd of people outside of the jail. Spaulding was heard yelling to his mom. "They say that we'll kill those guards if the authorities rush in. I'm not on that."

Marie (25:38):

After law enforcement blasted their way into the prison, another inmate stabbed him in the neck with a homemade knife. Spaulding lay on a cell floor unattended near death for over an hour before he received any medical attention. When he was finally admitted to the hospital, he managed to pass a note to reporters. In it he wrote that he guards at Ohio Penitentiary were responsible for providing weapons and narcotics to the inmates and inciting the riot. The note in part read, "Guards started the August riot. They didn't want Koloski as warden. He didn't allow for their mistreatment. There were nine guards being held. If the cons killed them, we all were going to die. They know I was cut because I didn't want those guards killed after they blew the wall. They can't say this, for it would get me killed if I am sent back to the pen, and they don't want to give me this type of credit."

Marie (26:34):

Making this type of serious allegation would not win Spaulding any support with Ohio Penitentiary, with either the inmates or the guards. So much so that he feared for his life, a concern that was shared by the pen's new warden, who would eventually transfer him to another prison saying, "We had fears for his life. I mean, if they tried to kill him once, there's every chance they'll try and do it again."

Marie (26:56):

If telling the public that guards were behind the riot would only ensure that a bigger target would be put on his back, why would Spaulding make these claims? His lawyer at the time told the Dayton Daily, "Spaulding took his life in his hands to reveal this. We have no way of proving these charges, but other prisoners have confirmed it to me also. And if the guards responsible or those who know about this will talk, it would help settle a lot of problems at that place."

Marie (27:24):

After Spaulding cooperated with law enforcement and was transferred to another prison, the new Ohio Pen warden even spoke about granting him executive clemency. Paul [David 00:27:34], one of the captive guards during the riot said of Spaulding that he was not a trouble maker or a ringleader. "When he had his throat slashed, I thought it was because he was refusing to go along with the rioting inmates' orders."

Marie (27:47):

The accusations about the guards and the riots go dead quiet after September of that same year, just a little over a month after the riots occurred. Instead of Clemency, in 1969 Edward Spaulding was convicted of two of five counts of inciting the riot himself and was sentenced to five to 30 years for each count. Two years later, the court refused to hear his appeal.

Marie (28:13):

After 1971, Edward Spaulding goes missing from any other newspaper articles. The possible causes of the 1968 riots go quiet, with the exception of one article. The article states, "The prison officials could not determine how inmates could have possibly obtained the half gallon of gasoline and the 30 ounces of lighter fluid that they said that they would use to burn their guard hostages."

Marie (28:39):

Ten years after this dark event in Ohio history, the guards that were held hostage recall their time. Paul Davis, one of the first guards to be taken hostage, likens the experience to being a living corpse, and that a decade later the memory of those 30 hours stays with him most of the time. He had to testify at the trial of the inmates charged with inciting the riot and had his life threatened repeatedly because of it. He described what would now be probably diagnosed as PTSD.

Marie (29:26):

Paul Freshour was also interviewed in the same article. He says ...

Paul Freshour (29:31):

I still have nightmares every once in a while, but considering it all I feel I'm lucky that I'm as well adjusted as I am, considering how close I came to death.

Marie (29:41):

Freshour says that he himself has no lasting effects from the event, but ...

Paul Freshour (29:46):

Every time I see someone that I haven't seen for some time, they always ask me if I've become an alcoholic or go to a therapist or have any effects.

Marie (29:56):

He continues ...

Paul Freshour (29:58):

I think the public should be aware of the things that go on inside those prisons. The dope, the rapes, they just won't believe it. The worst memory of the 30 hours was when the inmates started to get high on drugs, like it was a big hazy party. A bunch of them started love nesting, having sex right in front of the cell where we were like they were putting on a little show for us. It was sick. It was horrible.

Marie (30:23):

Freshour continues by saying that he had lost touch with the other former guards who were all held hostage during the same time.

Paul Freshour (30:31):

At one time we were all planning to get together every August, but it fell through. I guess we really didn't wanna get together and commemorate a nightmare. Who wants to remember hell?

Marie (30:44):

Of all of the guards held hostage during the 1969 Ohio Pen riots who spoke to the press, most of their stories, at least the printed versions available to the public, are relatively consistent. They were terrified, confused, under extreme stress, but somehow on some level recognized the humanity of their captors, the inmates. A decade after that event some felt that the event marked a dark turn that their life had yet to resolve.

Marie (31:09):

Paul Freshour 's account is more curious than that of his fellow captives, starting with the account of the singing inmate, the one playing the guitar that brought others, some hardened men, to tears during the melee of the riot itself, all the way to a decade later, the story suddenly becoming that the inmates were actually involved in a drug fueled orgy. It's very difficult to reconcile these two events to each other, but then also it's difficult to reconcile them to the accounts from the other guards.

Marie (31:40):

Yes, there were reports of drugs being used by inmates during the riot. There's multiple reports of inmates threatening the guards for their lives if the demands are not met, and after law enforcement used explosives to rescue the captives, there was definitely widespread chaos.

Marie (31:58):

While it's difficult to reconcile Paul Freshour 's recollection of the riot, the frequency on how often he gave interviews to the press is clear. In contrast to the other guards, Paul Freshour was interviewed, quoted, and even photographed more than his other nine captive guards with the exception of one, Paul Davis. Immediately after the riot, he is quoted in multiple syndicated newspapers, sometimes with Paul Davis and Steve Huffman, but also on his own. Freshour 's photo appears in Ohio newspapers more than all of the other guards as well, again with the exception of Paul Davis. Notably, for the follow up story a decade later, Freshour is prominently featured. In a strange turn of circumstance, this follow up article from July 20th of 1978 was one year and a day from the fatal accident that killed Ron Gillespie.

Marie (32:50):

Paul Freshour 's relationship to law enforcement, especially Circleville's sheriff, had already begun to sour. At the same time, Sheriff Radcliffe and his office were still the target of the rage and indignation of the Circleville letter writer. Letter after letter accused Radcliffe of covering up murders, of cronyism, of corruption. Much like how Ohio Pen's Warden Koloski was maligned as not being supportive of his guards or portrayed as weak, the letter writer was determined to show Circleville that the man they elected to office as sheriff was unfit to wear his badge. It was a shadow campaign that ended Koloski's time as warden at Ohio Pen. What if what Edward Spaulding risked his life to tell reporters was actually true? Guards with gripes about Koloski used inmates to force a conflict that would result in his dismissal. If guards were behind the riot, they planned a very public conflict that garnered a lot of attention from the media. Inciting a riot would get the maximum desired result while keeping them removed from accountability, and also without showing any regard for the cost of human life.

Marie (34:01):

Does the 1968 Ohio Pen riots maybe show us a man who early on could persuade others to take his side, and then retreat into the shadow? Their identity and motivation hidden, this guard exerted power over not just his inmates, his fellow guards, law enforcement, the media, but ultimately over his true target, the authority of Warden Koloski himself. Is it possible that a decade after Paul Freshour was a captive guard at Ohio Pen he would go on to become the Circleville letter writer? Or was there someone else, someone who used Freshour , who set him up so well that less than six years later he'd be sentenced to prison for attempted murder? Someone who was with Paul Freshour even when he was a prison guard, someone who knew his routine, his habits. Someone close to him. Someone like family.

Background music (34:57):

Ghost of a steam train echoes down my track.

Marie (35:03):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains Podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On our next episode, we look at those people close enough to Paul Freshour who, behind the closed doors of Circleville, could've picked up a pen and put him away.

Background music (35:22):

... and I probably will, but I shoulda put some joy back in this town called malice, Hey. Oooh, this town called malice. Oooh.

Marie (35:46):

Hey, wanna know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @WhateverRemains or online at WhateverRemainsPodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show and give us a five star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts. Your reviews do help others to find the show and we adore hearing from our listeners, so please reach out.

Marie (36:09):

Our intro music is by Group Rhoda. The closing song for Circleville is performed by Ed Grabinowski, produced by Rich Root. The all seeing eye, or our logo, is by the super talented DezdiMona. This has been a copyright Five Orange Pips production, all rights reserved.

Season 3 Episode 5: Five Points Pike

Marie Mayhew (00:15):

(silence). In the decade long story of the Circleville Letters, there are things that incited the anonymous letter writer's campaign of hate against this small town. The alleged affair between Gordon Massie and Mary Gillispie, the school district's perceived indifference to their demands, law enforcement's seemingly blind eye to the writer's accusations. The

Marie Mayhew (00:51):

Circleville letter writer could be written off, some lone crackpot, malicious, unwell, but for the most part not a grave threat. Hiding behind their pen and paper, the writer appeared content to wreak havoc on their targets' lives from a tidy distance. But then, on August 19th, 1977, one event changed the Circleville letter writer and grew their intent to harm others from just ink on paper to something altogether different and much more deadly.

Marie Mayhew (01:20):

What happened that night on a road called Five Points Pike put the Circleville letter writer on a path, a collision course to not only punish the Gillispies and the Massies, but the town of Circleville itself. And it would not end until someone paid with their life.

Marie Mayhew (01:37):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On this episode, the story of Ron Gillispie and Five Points Pike, the significant event that led the letter writer to put down their pen and pick up a gun.

Marie Mayhew (01:54):

On the night of August 19th, 1977, Ron Gillispie, Mary's husband, is at home with his two children. Over a year has passed since his wife, family, home, even his workplace, has been inundated with letters saying that his wife is sleeping with another man. When these vile letters weren't arriving in the Gillispie's mailbox, crude homemade signs were being posted on local roads like so many poisonous toadstools. While Mary denied any involvement with Gordon Massie, Ron Gillispie would have no doubt been under stress, with no real recourse to make the anonymous author stop.

Marie Mayhew (02:31):

On this night, his wife, Mary Gillispie, was on her way to Florida with Karen Sue Freshour, Sandy [Chifadoni 00:02:38], and Kate Pestel. In court testimony, Mary testifies that her and her friends traveled to Florida to relax. They did not meet anyone else there, including Gordon Massie. In fact, it was Paul Freshour, Mary's brother in law and Karen Sue's husband, that had made the arrangement for the stay there in Florida himself. His parents lived there.

Marie Mayhew (03:00):

At some point after 10:00 PM, Ron Gillispie reportedly receives a telephone call. There is no evidence who Ron was speaking to, or to the nature of their conversation.

Speaker 2 (03:11):

The call seemed to confirm Ron's suspicion about the identity of the letter writer. He told his daughter he was going out to confront the letter writer. He took his weapon, said goodbye to his little girl, and went out.

Marie Mayhew (03:22):

This scenario implies that Ron was speaking to the Circleville letter writer themselves, or someone who knew their identity. Something said on this call compelled Ron to immediately leave the house that night. It also implies that he knew where he was going. Ron was angered to such an extent that he grabbed his gun and stormed from the house, leaving behind two young children who beared witness to this arguably frightening event all alone. In many retellings of this account, the only child mentioned to be present that night is Traci, his youngest daughter. The act of taking a weapon from the house denotes that he had an intent to either protecting himself from harm or to threaten someone else.

Marie Mayhew (04:04):

After leaving the house, Ron is not heard from or seen again anywhere in Circleville. There are no records of him stopping or speaking to any other people. About 10 miles from the Gillispie's home on Brooks-Miller Road, Ron was traveling at excessive speeds, going northwest on Five Points Pike, a relatively well-traversed, paved, two-way road, about seven miles or 10 minutes from the Gillispie's home. There was no adverse weather. The two- way road would have been dry, but that portion of Five Points Pike was largely rural farmland. It would have been dark at night. There would have been no street lights.

Marie Mayhew (04:42):

At about 10:25 PM, about a tenth of a mile from McKenzie Road, just past the Greenlawn Community Church, Ron drove straight and failed to follow the curve in the road. Still traveling at a reportedly excessive speed, his red and white 1971 Ford pickup went off the left side of the roadway for about 37 feet and collided headfirst into a tree. Not wearing his seatbelt, Ron Gillispie was partially ejected from his vehicle from the left driver's side seat.

Marie Mayhew (05:11):

At 10:30 PM, dispatch receives a call reporting the accident. Five minutes later, officer Lee Gray, Unit 19, from the Pickaway Sheriff's Office arrives at the crash site. He's immediately followed by an ambulance. Ron Gillispie is taken to the Berger Hospital in Circleville, 18 miles or 26 minutes away. It is believed that he did not survive the initial impact, and is pronounced dead on arrival at Berger Hospital of massive trauma to the head and internal injuries. Much has been speculated about these events leading up to and including the crash at Five Points Pike.

Speaker 2 (05:50):

The letter writer warned Ron that his life was in danger. The letter writer had written saying that they were watching his home and truck, following Ron as he drove off. He was involved in a high speed chase. There were bullet holes found in the exterior of his pickup. Somewhere between leaving the house and hitting that tree, the gun he had took from the house had fired one shot. There was never any explanation for when, or how, at whom that gun could have been fired.

Marie Mayhew (06:22):

The known account of what occurred the night of the 19th in the Gillispie's home comes from Ron and Mary's children, the only eyewitnesses to their father's action. Traci was only eight at the time, and Eric was 15. And that's it, the children, namely Traci, provide the only account. It's safe to assume that the Gillispie children would have been questioned by law enforcement soon after the accident about what happened. Because both children were minors, they could have only been questioned under the supervision of an adult, most likely their mother, Mary.

Marie Mayhew (06:59):

Sometimes when law enforcement question young children about events that they have witness, they tend to provide very brief and vague details. Often the interviewer, including parents, must press them for more details, and lead children towards providing information that is more relevant to the investigation. Children are sometimes asked specific questions related to the possible behaviors about the person they witnessed.

Marie Mayhew (07:25):

This occurrence, or what is commonly referred to as the misinformation effect, is considered misleading because it distracts from the original memory, not because it is meant to be consciously deceitful. Misleading information is often given unintentionally, and can be as subtle as slight variations in the wording of a question. For example, two groups of participants were shown footage of a car accident. The first group was asked the question, "How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?" Versus the second group, who were asked, "How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?" And then both groups were asked, one, "How fast do you think the cars were traveling," and two, "Tell me something you remember from the picture of the crash."

Marie Mayhew (08:10):

Despite the fact that all participants both viewed the same footage, group one that heard the word smashed reported the cars were traveling at a speed up to 20% faster than group two, the group that heard the word hit. Even more, the group that heard the word smashed were more likely to elicit a false memory or remembering seeing broken glass at the site of the crash.

Marie Mayhew (08:35):

Misinformation can have an impact on how people receive and process information, and can help shape memory. The change in one word shows that we're vulnerable to a certain amount of suggestibility. Suggestibility measures how easily persuaded someone is to another influence, and the degree they'll change their own behavior to conform without critically challenging what they've been told.

Marie Mayhew (09:00):

Young children especially may have difficulty accurately answering suggestive questions because they may not have the cognitive or social skills to identify that they do not have an answer, and they may not understand the option that they don't even have to choose an answer. Children can fall into suggestibility because they want to appease an adult, like a teacher or a parent. They have a greater sense of trust that the adult is a credible source of information. What your parents or an adult tells you builds your reality as a young child. Children's understanding of their family dynamics may also lead them to provide an answer that they believe an adult like their parent would want to hear, rather than what they know or believe to be true.

Marie Mayhew (09:42):

Even highly emotionally charged events, commonly called flashbulb memories, or memories that are embedded in one's mind like a photographic imprint, are subject to being malleable. These memories were once considered to be highly accurate due to the intense overstimulation the subject experiences from the event, but more recent research supports the idea that memories from traumatic events, just like any others, are subject to misinformation and susceptibility.

Marie Mayhew (10:11):

There's a distinct possibility that Traci or Eric Gillispie's memory of what happened the night of August 19th, 1977, before their father left the house, was distorted by what they experienced in the aftermath of that event. What Traci or Eric remembered could have been altered after being exposed to misleading information related to the memory itself.

Marie Mayhew (10:33):

Ron and Mary were under extreme stress about the onslaught of anonymous letters arriving to their home and work. Their children would have been in tune with their anxiety and the effects it was having on their family. Even Paul Freshour recounts this stress felt by the Gillispies in his writing.

Speaker 2 (10:51):

Also, there were rather large signs being posted about Mary Gillispie's little daughter, who was only 12 years old at the time, referring to her also having sexual relations with Gordon Massie. This was terrible, and her father, Ronald Gillispie, got up early before going to work, drove around removing such signs so they couldn't be seen by his little daughter or the children on the bus.

Speaker 2 (11:15):

It had to be a pitiful life. Imagine living under these conditions. Also, what did the children see? Children were affected by all of this.

Marie Mayhew (11:25):

If the Gillispie children were questioned by an adult, a police officer or their mother, their account of Ron Gillispie's actions that night would have been compounded by this stress and the fact that they had just lost their father. Questions framed like, "Did your father seem mad after he got the call?" would be enough to mislead their information.

Marie Mayhew (11:45):

Given this context, it's difficult to say if Ron called someone, someone called him, or if there was even a telephone call at all. Ron could have just left the house for something as simple as running an errand. Because of the lateness of the hour, at around 10:00 PM, let's assume it was a telephone conversation that prompted Ron's action. Traci says that after the call, Ron, visibly upset, went upstairs and got his gun, a .22 caliber revolver, and left.

Marie Mayhew (12:13):

Here's where things get curious. Ron is furious. In his anger, he grabs the gun and leaves. The revolver is central to this story. It shows that Ron's serious, and it's the strangest piece of evidence at the crash site on Five Points Pike. By midnight, an hour and a half after the crash, after Ron's body has been taken by the ambulance, the Sheriff's investigators have cleared the accident site. Under the body of Ron Gillispie, they find an H&R .22 caliber revolver containing eight live rounds and one spent round. This means in the cylinder of the gun itself, there were eight unfired bullets and one fired casing. Also found in the cab of the pickup was one box of .22 caliber Winchester Western Wildcat ammo.

Marie Mayhew (13:02):

So in his fury, Ron Gillispie grabs the gun from his home on Brooks-Miller Road, but he did not have the foresight to also take his ammunition? The box of ammo is not mentioned in Traci's memory of the story. If he only took the gun, then where was the ammo, and why wouldn't these two things be kept together?

Marie Mayhew (13:20):

On September 1st, the Sheriff's Office submits both the .22 and the box of ammunition to their lab in London, Ohio, for the ballistics testing. These are their findings.

Speaker 3 (13:31):

Examination revealed the H&R revolver, Model 900, to be functional. Trigger pulls measured four and 10 and a half pounds, single and double action firing, respectively. There are traces of tan and red paint rubbed onto the left side of the top of the top strap. The eight cartridges and cartridge case removed from the revolver are of Winchester Wildcat, head stamped .22 caliber long rifle ammunition, similar to the 24 rounds of ammunition in the box labeled as Winchester Wildcat. The firing pin impression on the fired case was identified to this revolver. A search of our open case files against this revolver was negative.

Marie Mayhew (14:12):

Also, another detail that has not been included in the story, the paint traces on the left side of the top of the top strap. The top strap is the long piece of metal that lies on the top of the revolver's cylinder, roughly two to three inches long. Its flat surface is raised on the top of the gun.

Marie Mayhew (14:29):

On Ron Gillispie's revolver, into the left side of the top strap, the gun had traces of tan and red paint rubbed into it, as if wherever the revolver was kept, the left side of the top of the gun had been in contact with a painted surface. More than just in contact, it had been continuously rubbed against a painted surface for a long enough period of time that the red and tan paint wore itself onto the gun. For trace contact to occur, there must be motion, enough constant motion to rub the paint onto the top strap.

Marie Mayhew (15:02):

So where would this have happened in the Gillispie's home? Where would the revolver and ammo been kept that one side of the gun was resting against a red and tan painted surface, and that would also have enough friction to transfer paint from one to the other? The one logical place this could have happened is not in the Gillispie's home, but in the glove compartment of Ron's red and white Ford pickup. The .22 revolver with the box of ammo could have been kept in this small space, the top strap picking up paint transfer when the truck was driven.

Marie Mayhew (15:34):

As for the eight live rounds versus the one spent round in the revolver's cylinder, there's nothing present that shows when that bullet was fired. Whether it was that night, or days or months prior, all the spent round tells us is that at some point the gun was fired. If Ron had both the gun and the ammo in the house together, then why not change out that one spent round before taking his gun out for a possible confrontation with the letter writer, being sure he had a fully loaded weapon just in case? If he was in such a rush to get out of the house, then why not take the ammo?

Marie Mayhew (16:10):

The other significant evidence came in on August 29th, when the Pickaway coroner released their report on the investigation.

Speaker 4 (16:19):

Regarding the death of Ronald Gillispie, 35 years old, on August 19th, 1977. I was informed that the body of Ronald Gillispie, 7100 Brooks-Miller Road, Pickaway County, whose death occurred in a suspicious or an unusual manner, had been found within this county. Whereupon I went forthwith to the emergency room, Berger Hospital, the place where the body was, and proceeded to inquire how the deceased came to his death.

Speaker 4 (16:46):

After personal observation of the corpse as required by law, I am considering the surrounding circumstances, together with the statements of persons having adequate knowledge of the facts, I reached the conclusion that no autopsy and no inquest was necessary. I find that the cause of death was massive head and torso trauma. His pickup truck went out of control, ran into a tree on the Five Points Pike, Darby turnpike. Blood alcohol 0.16%, time of death approximated 10:25 PM.

Marie Mayhew (17:19):

These findings came not from the coroner himself but from the blood chemistry report from a pathologist at Brown Laboratories in Columbus. Ron Gillispie was 5'7" tall, and weighed about 155 pounds. To have a blood alcohol level of 0.16% meant that he would have had to have had more than four drinks the night of August 19th before 10:00 PM. He would have been legally intoxicated, so there would have been significant impairment to Ron's coordination, judgment, reaction time, and memory. He definitely would be dangerously impaired to drive his truck.

Marie Mayhew (17:55):

Much is made about whether or not Ron Gillispie was intoxicated. Again, Paul Freshour wrote, "While the Sheriff's investigation showed Ron was drunk and hit a tree, anyone who knew Ron believed this was untrue. Unsolved Mysteries makes a point of saying that many people believed that the Sheriff's Department attempted to cover up Ron's death by claiming he had high levels of alcohol in his system, thereby ruling the crash an accident, or that the Gillispie's friends and family said that he rarely drank.

Marie Mayhew (18:24):

A more probable story is that while staying at home on the night of August 19th, 1977, Ron Gillispie drank some beer. It was a Friday night, Mary was traveling with friends, and he had just worked a long week on top of worrying about driving around town to find crude signs posted about his wife and daughter. Ron Gillispie wasn't planning on going anywhere, so he just wanted to relax for just one night. Just relax and not have to worry about what was going to hit the fan next in his family's life.

Marie Mayhew (18:55):

Then, later that night, he has a telephone conversation that upsets him, remembering that it may not have taken much because by then his judgment is impaired. Maybe, like Mary said, he had an idea who was causing these problems and made the call himself, or maybe the letter writer called him. Ron decides he needs to go somewhere, possibly to confront the letter writer. His children are asleep. He's thinking whatever his task, it shouldn't take long so best not to wake them. He leaves the house empty handed and gets into his pickup truck.

Marie Mayhew (19:27):

This is his critical error. He's had too much to drink. He gets lost, missing turns. It's night and very dark out. Ron ends up on an unlit rural stretch of road about 15 or 20 minutes later. There's not a lot of residents on that portion of Five Points Pike in the late 1970s. If he was going to meet the letter writer, he's off course. Driving at an excessive speed and trying to get back on track to wherever he was headed, he misses a curve in the road. Not wearing a seatbelt, Ron loses control of his truck and is killed when his truck collides into a tree.

Marie Mayhew (20:04):

This collision does extensive damage to the left side of the pickup's cab. The driver's side seat is rammed through the front windshield. The roof is crumpled like a tin can. The driver's side door is on the ground next to the crash, a twisted piece of metal. There is nothing in the evidence that I've seen that supports any claim of foul play. No high-speed chase, no bullet holes. Ron's 1971 Ford pickup was towed and totaled not because of some coverup by his wife, but because the vehicle was both undriveable and a gruesome memento of his death.

Marie Mayhew (20:39):

It's equally hard to say that the man who grabbed his gun and kissed his daughter goodbye is the same man that every morning drove around the town tearing down obscene signs. Ron Gillispie wanted to protect his family from the letter writer, not make them complicit in this story. What happened that night at Five Points Pike was a tragic accident. Ron Gillispie made a human error to drive intoxicated. It does appear that he would not have left his home that night if something hadn't have prompted him, goaded him to do so.

Marie Mayhew (21:09):

While the crash was an accident, this sad event became nothing less than a call to arms for the Circleville letter writer, who would claim that Ron Gillispie was murdered, killed by his own wife and Gordon Massie, and that the Sheriff's Office not only ignored any foul play but even falsified evidence to protect Gordon Massie. The Circleville letter writer laid blame on one man, Sheriff Dwight Radcliffe. According to the Circleville letter writer, Radcliff turned a wilful blind eye and protected Gordon Massie, even covering up a murder for him. Corrupt, Sheriff Radcliff didn't know, or even care, about Ron Gillispie or anyone else. Radcliff was only looking out for his own interests.

Marie Mayhew (21:50):

We'll look at the Sheriff's Office and their investigation more on a later episode, but for now, let's end with the last occurrence from the accident at Five Points Pike. It is now very early the morning of August 20th. Law enforcement has cleared the scene, the wreckage has been examined and towed. The body at this point, while still at Berger Hospital, has been claimed by the coroner's office and has been moved to the morgue.

Marie Mayhew (22:14):

There's only one other event that needs to happen in this grim proceeding. Someone close to the deceased has to look at what's left of this person that they cared about and verify who they were in life, and so is the case here. From the special death report of Ronald L. Gillispie, body identified by Sheriff Dwight E. Radcliff. Relationship to the deceased reads only one word, friend.

Marie Mayhew (22:43):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On our next episode we'll look at the five years following the death of Ron Gillispie, and the effects that it had on his friends, his family, and how the Circleville letter writer moved on from just anonymously filling people's mailbox with hate to making an open attempt on the life of Mary Gillispie.

Speaker 5 (23:07):

(singing).

Marie Mayhew (23:12):

Hey, wanna know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @WhateverRemains, or online at whateverremainspodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show, and give us a five star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Your reviews do help others to find the show, and we adore hearing from our listeners, so please reach out. Our intro music is by Group Rhoda. The closing song for Circleville is performed by Ed Grabianowski, produced by Rich Root. The all-seeing eye, or our logo, is by the super talented Desdemona. This has been a copyright Five Orange Pips production, all rights reserved.

Season 3 Episode 4: Ron, Mary, Karen & Paul

Marie (00:18):

In the long course of a day everyone will face down their own unique assortment of pet peeves. We smile through gritted teeth when interacting with other people who grate on our nerves, the neighbor who still has their Christmas decorations up in March, the coworker who microwaves fish sticks repeatedly.

Marie (00:38):

The majority of us weave through these minor annoyances and by the end of the day we're relatively unphased, accepting that we get to do it all again the following morning. Largely, we've learned to forgive and forget.

Marie (00:51):

But for someone like Circleville's anonymous letter writer, their mind snags on one of these small perceived slights and everything after that unravels. Something about the normal daily wear and tear isn't so easily shrugged off but, instead, runs on repeat, constantly a fresh wound, never fading.

Marie (01:09):

What sort of person would write and send a threatening anonymous letter? What lived in the mind of the Circleville letter writer that made them pick up a pencil, some paper, and a 13 cent stamp and begin to poison their community with so much hate that we remember it almost 50 years later, with an intent and commitment not just to try it once or a couple of times with just a few letters, but thousands of them over a decade. To hide in plain sight, amongst their friends, family, neighbors, never letting on to under that ordinary veneer they were capable of so much malice.

Marie (01:43):

The Circleville letter writer did not believe in forgive and forget. Their conviction put them on a very different path. But what finally made them put down their pen and pick up a gun?

Marie (02:08):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On this episode, we look at some of the psychological factors that make up anonymous letter writers and start to look at who, in this small town, that profile could fit.

Marie (02:28):

The Circleville letters would continue to plague the town through 1977 and into 1983. Over those six years the general tone and tenor of the anonymous communications stayed constant.

Speaker 2 (02:41):

Letter number five, sent March 18th, 1977. No return address. Sent to Westfall High School, attention Vice Principal. Dear School, talk to Gordon Massie about his affairs. I shall warn you, I know the truth. I want to protect your school. It has a good reputation. You should keep it like that. I shall send you proof about driver number 62917. She has a child in school there now. I shall prove this shortly. I expect him then to be discharged. You'll see that I am telling the truth.

Marie (03:33):

At some point in this timeframe this anonymous letter writer graduated from just threatening individuals in the mail to actually trying to kill one. But the target was not Gordon Massie, the focus of the letters early on, but Mary Gillespie, the woman the writer accused of having an affair with Massie.

Marie (03:50):

We'll go into the attempted murder in a later episode in detail. But really, above everything else, we should try to understand the kind of person that would make this type of anonymous threat. An anonymous threat can take many different guises and as many different intents. A bomb threat phoned into an office building is different in its nature than say cyber-bullying on social media. Anonymous letters can usually be classified into categories according to their theme or tone. For example, threatening, obscene, racial, extortion, nuance, stool pigeon, or guilty conscience.

Marie (04:27):

Anonymous letters may sometimes be further divided into those that relay a general message, those that carry a personal or specific message, and those that are sent to a certain group of individuals, businesses, or people. The one thing that all of these categories share is the anonymous letter writer suffers from a condition that can be very difficult to detect.

Marie (04:48):

Renna Nezos writes, in Judicial Graphology, that this type of personality is socially maladjusted and suffers from acute feelings of persecution and excessive jealousy. They can become quarrelsome, reluctant to admit fault, and have set opinions.

Marie (05:04):

Now, I realize this sounds like a lot of people, myself included. The main difference to keep in mind is that there's a continuum. Normal behavior of it includes individual biases to suffering from afflictions where these behaviors become so extreme they govern over all other emotions and reason.

Marie (05:21):

Anonymous letter writers are prone to become adversarial, make situations needlessly more difficult by engineering arguments. When a confrontation arises, this type of personality will use coercion in order to persuade other people to take their sides, not wishing to take blame themselves. This behavior can mask feelings of personal inadequacy and is often coupled with feelings of mistrust and paranoia.

Marie (05:46):

By transferring their own anxiety onto others, the anonymous letter writer feels justification and a sense of security in their actions. The need to exhort power drives the anonymous letter writer to manipulate their selected victims actions and thoughts. Their correspondence may be planned with care to hit the target and then they may retreat into hiding to await the results.

Marie (06:11):

With their identities hidden, people will indulge in marginal behavior they wouldn't normally allow themselves, according to psychologist Roland Maiuro, an Associate Professor at the University of Washington, and editor of The Journal of Violence and Victims. Disinhibition lowers behavioral constraints normally felt during more personal interactions.

Marie (06:32):

An anonymous person doesn't want to be held accountable, Maiuro says. Being anonymous breeds aggressive behavior. They can be a tyrant in their own home, ruling the household with their set routine and views. Socially, however, in the rest of the world, their self confidence is often very fragile and they can be perceived as compliant or overly agreeable people.

Marie (06:54):

Maiuro continues, the psychological profile of an anonymous threatener is a person who is obsessive, who may be fixated on a public figure, have delusional ideas about the individual, or has targeted him or her as responsible for something particularly bad. They can especially attach importance to the idea of respectability, or what is considered respectable behavior.

Marie (07:16):

Threateners often believe that they are righting a wrong. They see their behavior as altruistic, Maiuro says. The letter writer often feels weak or helpless. This person perceives the public figure as powerful, the perpetrator of the threateners problems.

Marie (07:33):

What has been found to be true about anonymous letter writers is that they are generally not openly disagreeable people and continue to socialize and function normally. They generally do not behave in an obviously odd or bizarre manner. Their emotional life, however, is not satisfying. And they may have recently been severely disappointed or disillusioned. Examples of this could be not receiving an inheritance or being passed over for promotion.

Marie (07:59):

The anonymous letter writer probably lives in the same area as their target and will have some way of witnessing or even interacting with the victim's reaction to their distressing letter. They often tend to be inconsequential people to their target. The writer may be a member of the family, an unnoticed employee, a slighted friend, or a neighbor who has never been noticed before by their victim.

Marie (08:22):

So what does this tell us about the Circleville letter writer? To start, they feel justified in making these accusations about Gordon Massie and the Gillespies. They see their actions as altruistic in calling out Gordon Massie. They're righting a wrong by seeking his dismissal.

Marie (08:39):

Massie, a school superintendent in a small town, is a relatively known public figure. He was written about in the local newspapers on a fairly frequent basis. The letter writer perceives Massie as the perpetrator of the threatener and, really, all of Circleville's problems. In the writer's righteous indignation he's an adulterer, or worse, a predator that needs to be dealt with.

Marie (09:03):

The Circleville letter writer is secure in their actions and definitely has attached importance to respectability, or what is considered respectable behavior. Outwardly, they would be seemingly agreeable and normal. Because anonymous letters are a symptom of feeling powerless, the Circleville letter writer may have believed that they were overlooked, taken for granted, or just not being heard. They could have been triggered to start writing these letters by some recent loss or some severe disappointment.

Marie (09:35):

If this background holds true then the Circleville letter writer would have known Gordon Massie, or the Gillespies, or had some connection with the school district. They would have been able to involve themselves in the emotional aftermath that the letters caused, maybe as a member of the family, a friend, or another teacher.

Marie (09:55):

So then, who were Gordon Massie and Mary Gillespie's family, friends, and coworkers? Gordon Massie, the Westfall School Superintendent was the original recipient of the letters. Massie was accused of sexual harassment and having affairs with bus drivers that worked in his district. He had worked in local Ohio education since graduating college, was married to Clara Clegg, also an educator, and had one son, William.

Marie (10:24):

When the letters started in the late '70s, William, his son, would have been a late teen or in his early 20's. Mary Gillespie, the focus of the letters as time went on, was one of these bus drivers accused of having an affair with Massie. In 1977 she had been working in this position for a number of years. She was married to her husband, Ron Gillespie, and they had two children, Tracey and Eric.

Marie (10:52):

Her husband, Ron Gillespie, came from a good sized family and had a sister, Karen Sue, who lived in nearby Columbus with her husband, Paul Freshour and their two daughters, Dawn and Senna, and a son, Mark. In the mid-1970's the relationship between these two families, the Gillespies and the Freshour 's, comes mostly through first hand accounts in court transcripts, or through newspapers that reported on the story at the time.

Marie (11:20):

As we mentioned, Mary Gillespie was a bus driver for the Westfall School District. In the 1970's, this would be a secure position since many rural families would rely on busing to get their kids to school. Her husband, Ron, worked at Pittsburgh Plate Glass.

Marie (11:36):

Karen Sue Freshour , Ron's sister, worked for the U.S. Trotting Association, based out of Columbus. That's a nonprofit organization involved in horse racing. There she worked in the microfilm department. She was also good with numbers and helped them with finances. Her husband, Paul, worked as a Quality Control Inspector at the Anheuser Busch plant in Columbus. Both couples were gainfully employed, earning what would be considered a solid, middle class income for the time. They owned their own homes. Their children attended public school. The point being, both of these families were very normal.

Marie (12:14):

According to Mary, both her and her husband had a very close relationship with Karen Sue. Mary describes that they got along fairly well with her but less so with her husband, Paul. In court transcripts, Mary describes the relationship between Paul and her husband, Ron, as amicable but not especially good. However, when asked if Paul Freshourmade a habit out of minding his own business, Mary flatly answers, no. When opposing counsel asked her if she got along with him fairly well, she only offers back a lukewarm, I suppose.

Marie (12:49):

Mary Gillespie is answering these questions during the trial where Paul Freshouris accused of trying to kill her so it is possible that that is coloring her opinion. However, she also testified that she never felt threatened by Paul and he never asked about her relationship with Gordon Massie. We'll talk about that trial in later episodes. But for right now, it's important to understand that this is really the only information we have about how Mary felt about her relatives.

Marie (13:17):

In the court transcripts, it appears that Mary has known Paul for a long time. At that point, more than 20 years. And did not think that he was capable of any significant level of violence. And certainly not the level of animosity that was displayed in the letters. She communicated with him about receiving the letters and the concern they caused her and her family.

Marie (13:37):

But she also does not seem to have a very close relationship to the Freshour 's, or at least to Paul. She is very clear about her and her husband being close to Karen Sue but only amicable with Paul. Amicable is a pretty distant way of describing a relationship, especially one about knowing your brother-in-law for over 20 years. Again granted, he's on trial for trying to kill her. But you could argue that she should even have more heated words and be more upset. Your close family member tried to kill you. Someone you've known and trusted for a long time. But what Mary said was, for both her and her husband, the relationship was amicable, but not especially good.

Marie (14:17):

Mary's distance comes in sharp contrast to how Paul Freshour , himself, describes his relationship with Ron and Mary. In most written accounts Paul said that he considered Ron to be his best friend and commiserated about the terrible stress that these letters put on the Gillespie family, especially the toll that they took on Ron.

Speaker 2 (14:40):

Letter number 11. Sent April 14th, 1977. Return address, 550 Ridgewood, Circleville, Ohio. Sent to Mr. Ron Gillespie. Attention Ron. Gillespie, you have had two weeks and done nothing. You are a pig defender. You are also a pig. Make her admit the trust and inform the school board. If not, I will broadcast it on posters, signs, billboards until the truth comes out. Only pigs ride motorcycles. Good hunting in your red and white truck on your way to work.

Speaker 2 (15:32):

Remember, she hung in his office constantly until she broke up his marriage and home. Contact people at school. They're aware. They are starting to laugh and not only at her. Let her read this. It is no lie. She knows I'm telling no lie. I followed him for weeks, since last summer, and have seen her meet him several times. He knew if caught there would be trouble.

Speaker 2 (16:08):

He is not as serious as people think. He isn't concerned about your family, only himself. He can't have affairs with school employees and keep his job. He knows what I want. When he quits I'll go away. All you have to do is talk and ask questions from the people that work there. You will see this is no joke.

Marie (16:38):

Paul Freshour , himself, says of this time period,

Paul (16:41):

Ron was devastated and distraught. He didn't get much sleep during that period of time in his life. He was frantic and would drive around an hour or two in the morning before his shift began, looking for any obscene posted signs. He went out of his way looking for the signs to prevent his daughter, and any other kids on his wife's school bus, from having to see them. Ron worked very hard to figure out what it was really all about and to have the problem solved.

Marie (17:07):

Freshourreports that he initially recommended that Ron take the letters to Dwight Radcliff, the Pickaway County Sheriff. Paul says he assumed that the sheriff would question possible suspects and maybe the obscene letters would stop. According to Freshour , Paul complained,

Paul (17:24):

That the sheriff was not taking these threats seriously and didn't want to be inconvenienced by an investigation of the letters. The sheriff told Ron that he had to spend most of his time on more important investigations, causing Ron to take matters into his own hands. Ron tried desperately to find out who was writing the letters. I helped as much as I could.

Marie (17:45):

Freshouralso said that he became involved in the Gillespie's problems...

Paul (17:50):

... for his nieces sake. Tracey was like one of his own children and spent a great deal of time with his two daughters. But, most importantly, he wanted to help Ron. Ron felt so bad about everything.

Marie (18:02):

Paul would also say the Gillespies believe that they knew who the letter writer was and asked for his help. Mary's plan was to expose them, or to at least to get them to stop. Paul Freshoursaid,

Paul (18:15):

We thought we'd scare the guy. We sent him four or five letters only. There was no violence in them or anything, just that we knew who he was and what he was doing. And we sent him the letters.

Marie (18:25):

The Gillespies and Paul wrote their own anonymous letters to the person they believed was the Circleville letter writer. This event is puzzling, at least to me, and it's worth taking note. It's not completely clear who these letters were sent to or how they were even involved, or how Ron, Mary, and Paul even arrived at this conclusion.

Marie (18:45):

This event took place early in the overall timeline, 1976, before the letters were widely known by the residents of Circleville. The group of people that would have known where Mary worked, her ID for her bus, or who Gordon Massie was would be small. Smaller still would be the group of people that would care if they were actually having an affair and demand that Massie be fired. There has been speculation that the person who sent these letters was William G. Massie, Gordon Massie's son. Some of the later anonymous letters were even signed by Bill Massie.

Marie (19:21):

William Massie was born in 1957 and would have been just 18 or 19 in 1976, when the letters started. He would have just graduated from Circleville High School in 1975 and still living at home with his parents, Gordon and Clara.

Marie (19:37):

Soon, after William Massie's graduation, Clara Massie filed for divorce from Gordon siting alleged gross neglective duty and extreme cruelty. In the context of divorce law, gross neglect refers to a willful failure to perform some marital obligation. For example, in Ohio law a husband and wife owe each other the obligation of mutual respect, fidelity, and support. Case law has interpreted the term to include, among other things, a substantial failure to provide financial support when able to do so, failure to support each other in times of great emotional distress. However, the term gross negligence of duty doesn't have any concrete definition which can be applied to all cases.

Marie (20:22):

In general, cruelty doesn't mean just being mean or disagreeable to your husband or wife. But rather that unnecessary physical or emotional pain is being gratuitously inflicted by one spouse upon another. Incompatible is not getting along and functioning as partners. Cruel and inhumane treatment could involve physical, emotional, and financial abuse, including physical attacks such as beating or gambling away money, unexplained absences from home, dating someone else, or abusing someone in the family.

Marie (20:56):

Clearly the Massie home could have been stressful for a child during this time and William Massie may have had issues with his home life. But for William Massie to be the Circleville letter writer also has some sizable logic flaws. To be the writer he would have had to have had in depth knowledge of other families besides his own, like the Gillespies. He would have had to have known Ron Gillespie's place of employment, the type of car he drove, when he was at home.

Marie (21:22):

If William Massie was the letter writer this would also mean that he was writing and then mailing letters from Columbus on a frequent basis. He would be sending letters to a lot of different people, including his father's supervisors, and calling for immediate termination from his job, all while potentially living under Gordon Massie's roof. Also, the Massie's reconciled and dismissed the divorce in November 1976, six months before the letters started to arrive to Mary Gillespie.

Marie (21:53):

The assumption that William Massie was the letter writer also means that the Gillespies and Paul wrote their own anonymous letters to an 18 year old who was still living with his parents. And this is where I would raise the question, why wouldn't Mary, Ron, and Paul just contact William Massie's parents directly about their concerns? Why write anonymous letters back to William Massie at his parents house. It almost seems equally harmful for adults to anonymously retaliate against a teenager who may not be guilty. It also does not seem like something parents with children would readily do to some other child.

Marie (22:32):

So in early 1977 we have these families, the Gillespies and the Freshour 's, two married couples with children of their own, joined by siblings. Paul's wife, Karen, is Ron Gillespie's sister. And depending on who you ask, they may or may not be close. It may be safest to say that they are amicable and know a good deal about each other's lives. And, in early 1977, Mary, Ron, Karen, and Paul certainly don't have any open ill will towards one another.

Marie (23:03):

But by August of 1977 everything changes when Ron Gillespie, the man Paul Freshour says was torn apart by these accusations, gets a call late one night. Enraged, he picks up a gun, gets in his truck, and drives off. He is not seen alive again or, at least, that's the story that we are led to believe.

Marie (23:24):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On our next episode we retrace Ron Gillespie's last night in Circleville and try to understand how what happened at Five Points Pike would come to affect all events in Circleville afterwards.

Speaker 4 (23:41):

(Singing) This town called malice. Who-o-o. This town called malice.

Marie (24:15):

Hey, wanna know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @WhateverRemains or online at WhateverRemainsPodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show and give us a five star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Your reviews do help others to find the show and we adore hearing from our listeners, so please reach out.

Marie (24:39):

Our intro music is by group Rhoda. The closing song for Circleville is performed by Ed Grabianowski, produced by Rich Root. The all-seeing eye, or our logo, is by the super talented Desdemona. This has been a copyright Five Orange Pips production. All rights reserved.

Season 3 Episode 3: The known story of Circleville

Marie Mayhew (00:09):

When discussing this season being on the Circleville Letters, response fell squarely into one of two camps. One, the case is instantly recognizable, because it was made famous, in part, by Unsolved Mysteries and remains popular to this day. This is partially due to the story itself being pretty straightforwards with all the hallmarks of a good mystery. There's small-town intrigue, a seemingly omnipresent unknown villain extracting revenge on the people of Circleville by uncovering their secrets, a mysterious death, an elaborate attempted murder, a court case, and then at the story's end, the big twist with the wrongly-convicted man framed to take the fall for crimes that he could not have possibly committed. Or two, this subject has been done to death. I mean, after Robert Stack and Unsolved Mysteries, not to mention countless other re-tellings, what else can you possibly say about it? How much more is there to uncover about what happened in Circleville? The funny thing about the story of these letters, the people involved, and even the town itself is the more we research, the less familiar this straightforward story becomes.

Marie Mayhew (01:29):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. This episode, before we go any further with our own series, let's review the known story of the Circleville Letters, the one that you may already recognize. This version of the story is the foundation for practically all the narratives about this event and are widely regarded as the facts about this popular case. Just remember, facts are never what they seem to be.

Marie Mayhew (02:02):

1976, the small town of Circleville, Ohio, 25 miles south of Columbus, it's a place that rarely attracts outside attention. But then, the frightening letters started to arrive.

Theron LaFountain (02:16):

The first letter was received by Mary Gillespie, a school bus driver, telling her that the letter writer was aware that she was having an affair with the superintendent of schools and that it had better stop.

Marie Mayhew (02:28):

In addition to the allegations of an affair, the letter was threatening. It read in part, "I know where you live. I've been observing your house and know you have children. This is no joke. Please take it serious." Postmarked from Columbus, Ohio, there was no return address, no signature, no way of telling who sent it. Then a week later, Mary received another menacing letter making the same accusations. She tried to downplay the letter and kept them to herself until her husband, Ron, began to receive them, as well.

Theron LaFountain (03:01):

And this letter addressed to Ron Gillespie told him that if he didn't do something to stop the affair, that his life was undoubtedly in danger.

Marie Mayhew (03:10):

Now, besides threatening Mary, the anonymous author had turned their attentions to Ron. He received another letter soon after. It read in part, "Gillespie, you've had two weeks and done nothing. Make her admit the truth and inform the school board. If not, I will broadcast it until the truth comes out." Mary and Ron Gillespie evidently told three people about the letters, Ron's sister Karen, her husband, Paul Freshour, and Paul's sister. Mary had an idea about who was sending the letters, and she had a plan on how to expose them, or at least to try and get them to stop. Paul Freshour, Ron Gillespie's brother-in-law said:

Theron LaFountain (03:49):

"We thought we'd scare the guy. Well, we sent him four or five letters only. There was no violence in them or anything, just that we knew who he was and what he was doing, and we sent him the letters."

Marie Mayhew (04:01):

For a while, the plan worked, and the threatening letters stopped. Then in August of 1977, while Mary was on a trip out of town, Ron received a phone call at home. The call seemed to confirm Ron's suspicions about the identity of the letter writer.

Theron LaFountain (04:18):

He told his children he was going out to confront the letter writer. He took his weapon. He did not seem to be drunk, said good-bye to his children and went out.

Marie Mayhew (04:27):

Angry and upset, Ron hurried to his red and white pickup, even though the letter writer had written saying that they were watching it, and drove off.

Theron LaFountain (04:35):

Within a short distance, at an intersection that he knew very well, he lost control of the vehicle, hit a tree and was killed. Somewhere in-between leaving the house and hitting the tree, his gun had fired one shot, and there was never any explanation for when or how at whom that gun could have been fired.

Marie Mayhew (04:54):

The police ruled Ron Gillespie's death an accident, but several Circleville residents soon received anonymous letters accusing the sheriff of a coverup. Ron Gillespie's brother-in-law, Paul Freshour said the sheriff had changed his story:

Theron LaFountain (05:08):

"The sheriff agreed with me that there was foul play, and then when I contacted him again, he had changed his attitude completely. Then he was telling me that there wasn't foul play."

Marie Mayhew (05:19):

There was another potential inconsistency, as well.

Theron LaFountain (05:22):

Gillespie had .16% alcohol in his blood, which would in Ohio, be one and a half times the legal limit. Most people I have talked to said that he was not a heavy drinker, and that they were surprised by that kind of finding.

Marie Mayhew (05:38):

Was Ron Gillespie's death an accident? Was he really drunk that night, and why had one bullet been fired from his handgun? After Ron's death the letters kept coming. Mary kept driving the school bus route, but beginning in 1983, the letter writer began to put signs along her bus route saying obscene things about Gillespie's daughter. Mary finally took action.

Theron LaFountain (06:01):

She ripped down the sign. Much to her surprise, behind the sign was this box and string, and another post that was attached to the fence post. She took it into the bus and opened it up, and there was a small pistol.

Marie Mayhew (06:16):

When she looked closer, Mary realized that it was a crude booby trap designed to fire the gun at her. Investigators discovered that someone had tried to remove the serial number off of the weapon. The gun belonged to Mary's brother-in-law, Paul Freshour. He had just split up with his wife, Ron Gillespie's sister. Paul denied any involvement:

Theron LaFountain (06:37):

"I admitted the gun was mine, but I hadn't seen it for a long time. I had no reason to check up on it or anything, and I didn't know when it had come up missing. I really didn't know what happened to it, and I told them that, and that's the truth, and that's how it was."

Marie Mayhew (06:50):

On February 25th, 1983, Sheriff Dwight Radcliff asked Paul to take a handwriting test, and Paul agreed.

Theron LaFountain (06:58):

"He would give me the actual letter and asking me to do the envelope part just as near as I could to the envelope, and then on some, he would take the actual letter out and make me to do them as near as I could on the letters. And I did them, because I knew I wasn't responsible for the letters."

Marie Mayhew (07:15):

There are questions surrounding if this was the correct method to conduct handwriting analysis.

Theron LaFountain (07:20):

That is not the proper way to test to see if someone has a certain writing style, because if they're copying from a letter, they're going to try to emulate the style and the experts said that the testing was improper, so that they didn't really say that these letters were written by Paul Freshour. They said that they could have been.

Marie Mayhew (07:39):

The sheriff also searched Paul Freshour's property, his car, home and garage. All the evidence gathered was turned over to the courts. Paul was charged with attempted murder.

Theron LaFountain (07:50):

"He called the prosecutor and told the prosecutor that it was my writing on the booby trap and that I was under arrest for attempted murder and placed on a $50,000 bound."

Marie Mayhew (08:00):

On October 24th, 1983, Paul Freshour went to trial for attempted murder of his sister-in-law, Mary Gillespie. He wasn't charged with writing the threatening letters, but they were used as crucial evidence against him. On the stand, a handwriting expert said it was his opinion that the writing on the envelope, documents and postcards were made by the same person, Paul Freshour. Paul's boss testified that he hadn't gone to work the day the booby trap was found. Freshour never took the stand in his own defense, a decision he later said he regretted. Paul Freshour was found guilty of attempted murder and was given the maximum sentence, seven to 25 years. He said that the verdict was completely unexpected.

Theron LaFountain (08:42):

"I couldn't blame the jury, because the jury didn't hear all the evidence, but I just couldn't believe it. I was really in shock."

Marie Mayhew (08:49):

Once Paul was in jail, everyone assumed that since the letter writer was arrested, the letters themselves would stop. They were wrong.

Theron LaFountain (08:57):

They were being received all over a large area of central Ohio, so a lot of people couldn't understand how Paul Freshour could be mailing all these letters from prison.

Marie Mayhew (09:06):

Following repeated complaints from law enforcement, the prison's warden had Paul placed in solitary confinement, but the letters continued. All of them were postmarked Columbus, even though Paul was in prison across the state in Lima.

Theron LaFountain (09:20):

Full-scale investigations were conducted twice, possibly three times, during which Paul Freshour was put into isolation, and the warden of the prison then wrote a letter to Paul's wife saying that as far as he was concerned, it was impossible for Paul to be writing these letters and sending them from prison.

Marie Mayhew (09:37):

For seven years, Paul was a model prisoner, but when he became eligible for parole, the board rejected his request based on the volume of letters still being sent. A few days after his hearing, Paul himself received a sadistic letter from the phantom writer. It read in part, "Now, when are you going to believe you aren't going to get out of there? I told you two years ago, 'When we set them up, they stay set up.' Don't you listen at all?" May of 1994, Paul Freshour was finally granted parole after serving 10 years. Until his death, he maintains his innocence and is sure that the real criminal is still at large.

Theron LaFountain (10:15):

"I'd like to see someone really look at this case on the letters. Reopen the letter part of it and get in and find out who wrote the letters. I'd also like someone to look at my former brother-in-law's death. Look, that's not my family any more. That's my past. I'm not even going to look back at it. I've got a new family and a new future, but I'd like to see someone look at that accident really close and the letters."

Marie Mayhew (10:39):

The Circleville Letters finally stopped, but many questions remain. Who actually wrote the letters? Was Ron Gillespie's death an accident or was he murdered? And who made the booby trap found by Mary Gillespie?

Marie Mayhew (10:56):

That recap, by and large, is the transcript from Unsolved Mysteries and are the main points of what we know about this strange event. So did Unsolved Mysteries, the gold standard for all that's strange and spooky, get it right? Did the anonymous letter writer evade capture, only to taunt Paul Freshour in his jail cell?

Marie Mayhew (11:14):

They covered the five big points of the Circleville story: one, the ongoing and prolific letters harassing Mary Gillespie; two, her husband Ron's seemingly foretold and mysterious death; three, the arrest of Paul Freshour by an ardent sheriff's office; four, the trial of his attempted murder; five, the continuation of the anonymous letters even after his incarceration. No question, it's a mystery. Each of these point, even on their own, raise a lot of questions. How could one individual know so much about an entire town's secrets? What was the cause of Ron Gillespie's death just as he was going to meet and even expose the letter writer? Did the Circleville sheriff's office get the wrong man?

Marie Mayhew (12:02):

Like any good mystery, the basic facts, the ones reiterated over and over again, aren't really all that reliable, and they seemingly shift. The more you dig, the more this story about one small town in Ohio starts to change and unravel. As soon as we think we've figured out and answered one question, that very answer calls into question something else, setting in motion a vicious circle, if you'll forgive a really bad pun.

Marie Mayhew (12:31):

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. On the next episode, we continue our investigation, a la Robert Stack, with an examination of anonymous threateners and try to work out what drives someone to these extreme actions. We'll reintroduce the cast of characters discussed here, Mary Gillespie, her husband Ron, his sister Karen, and her husband Paul Freshour, and ask if the virus that was the Circleville letter writer could have started in this one seemingly close-knit family. Until then, remember, what goes around, come around.

Marie Mayhew (13:11):

Want to know What- Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @WhateverRemains or online at whateverremainspodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show and give us a five-star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Your reviews help others find the show, and we adore hearing from our listeners, so please reach out. Voiceover work for this episode was performed by Theron LaFountain. Our intro music is by Group Rhoda. Our closing song for Circleville is performed by Ed Grabianowski, produced by Rich [Ruse 00:14:25]. The All-Seeing Eye, or our logo, is by the super talented Desdemona, copyright, Five Orange Pips production, all rights reserved.

Interview with Martin Yant - First 3 Letters

Speaker 1 (00:15):

(singing)

Marie Mayhew (00:18):

Hi there. Thanks for listening to the Whatever Remains Podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. Thank you for tuning in to our episode recap on Circleville, with Martin Yant.

Marie Mayhew (00:51):

The subject of the Circleville Letters has been covered a lot, starting in the 1980s in local Ohio papers and TV, all the way to podcasts like this one. Arguably the most famous media coverage on Circleville would have to be its appearance on a TV show called Unsolved Mysteries. Now, if you don't know what Unsolved Mysteries is, first thing, shame on you. You need to turn off this podcast, go onto Amazon, and watch all of them. We'll wait here for you.

Marie Mayhew (01:20):

Unsolved Mysteries was, and really is, the gold standard of American true crime television. Robert Stack, in his trench coat, surrounded by swirling mist, looking out at the American viewing public and saying, "Join me. Perhaps you may be able to help solve a mystery." I mean, who's not going to say, "Yes, Robert Stack. Yes, I will join you. I will help solve that mystery."

Marie Mayhew (01:50):

The Circleville Letters were covered twice on the program, and we'll get into that more in later episodes. But the main important point is, that this story about this town wouldn't be famous, or even really well known, if it wasn't for the work of one man, private investigator Martin Yant. Martin Yant was originally a journalist and an editor, in Ohio. In 1991, he left working for news organizations and devoted himself to independent journalism, and to the investigations of possible wrongful convictions.

Marie Mayhew (02:20):

Yant's work aided in the exhortation of 32 wrongfully convicted individuals, two of whom were sentenced to the death penalty. He worked on a case that led to the largest civil rights settlement in Ohio history. In 1996, while representing himself, Yant won a public records case against the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation, in the Ohio Supreme Court.

Marie Mayhew (02:44):

Yant himself is a published author, writing books on his experiences and the subject of wrongful conviction. His book, Presumed Guilty: When Innocent People Are Wrongly Convicted, has been listed by the Washington Post as one of the most important books published on the miscarriage of justice. He's been on numerous TV and talk radio shows, and has had his investigations featured on NBC, the CBS evening news, 48 Hours, A&E's American Justice, The Discovery Channel, and Unsolved Mysteries.

Marie Mayhew (03:17):

Martin was hired to look into the conviction of Paul Freshour, the man that was ultimately sent to jail for attempted murder, and is largely believe by the Circleville police and the sheriff's office, to be the letter writer. All of which we will dig into later. Martin's research into this case did a couple of things. One, it raised questions about Freshour's conviction, and two, it introduced the story to a national audience, as seen with the coverage on Unsolved Mysteries.

Marie Mayhew (03:46):

I met Martin while researching Circleville, and he's agreed to join me in recapping what we've uncovered on the episodes. He's our first discussion on episode one, the first three letters. Enjoy.

Marie Mayhew (04:06):

So what did you think, in looking at the f- the first letter, again, March 2nd, 1977, sent to Westfall High School, "Attention, Massie", in quotes?

Martin Yant (04:25):

The transformation of these letters over the first few is very interesting. They start to become more like the traditional block print-

Marie Mayhew (04:34):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (04:35):

... as you go along. But if- initially they don't mention Mary Gillispie, which is odd.

Marie Mayhew (04:45):

Yeah.

Martin Yant (04:45):

Because as time went on, they became more and more obsessed, um, with Mary Gillispie. What made that kind of change? First, the writer was concerned about all the bus drivers.

Marie Mayhew (05:04):

Yeah, and it even says, "According to my girlfriend." So they're saying... I mean, in the original letter sent to Gordon Massie, they're saying that whoever is writing these letters, it's- it's their- it's his girlfriend, or their girlfriend that's- that is- that he's trying to protect. It's not about a single... it's about the girlfriend, yes, but it's about like the- his sexual harassment of this group of women has to stop. And that's what he... the- or the writer seems the most adamant about.

Marie Mayhew (05:43):

If I'm trying to understand what the author is asking for here in these letters, it's basically that Gordon Massie looses his job, or is exposes. There would have been a clause in his contract about... a morality clause, right? So if- if this was in fact proven, or alleged and proven going forward, he would have been fired by the school board.

Marie Mayhew (06:10):

But what I just keep coming back to is, again, the- the- the timing of these three letters, which is the first is sent on the 2nd of March. The following two, which go to the board of education, and to another- another local, um, supervisor, are sent just two days afterwards. Not even really two days, because it posted on the 4th. If I'm Gordon Massie, and I receive this letter... because it was addressed to him, and he would have, hypothetically, been the person to open it. There is no recourse in between me getting it (laughs) and it being sent to my, you know, m-my supervisor. So I think that that's, again, to me, is like very, very telling, in that they had an agenda.

Martin Yant (07:12):

The objective seems to be to get people upset with Gordon Massie.

Marie Mayhew (07:19):

Yes.

Martin Yant (07:21):

So it- it's- it strikes me, particularly in the first three letters, bang, Gordon Massie, you're a bad guy and you're going to be exposed.

Marie Mayhew (07:33):

Um, and we'll post- we'll post the PDFs on our website, so our listeners can also view the actual letter and the envelopes themselves, but one of the things that I think is really fascinating is the change in, um, between these letters on the- how the person was writing, or ch-choosing to write. Because-

Martin Yant (07:54):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Marie Mayhew (07:55):

... it seemed like, again, they went from... they're trying to establish what style they want to use, you know, to disguise their natural handwriting as they go. But the one to the school board, I thought was very interesting, because it was very, all caps, very, very legible. Very, like, uh, again, like it's actually really nice looking font (laugh). I was looking at it, and I was like, "Wow, this- if it wasn't such a menacing letter, it's- it's- it's very well written."

Marie Mayhew (08:22):

Um, so I thought that it was sort of a, you know, again, they're- they're like establishing their voice, and their style and their communication in this. But they're also, you know, kind of changing their story a little bit, in that, you know, th- at first, the one to him is- is very much like, "Hey, you need to- you need to, you know, lay off, um, harassing these women. It's not right, it's not well- it's not good for the school, it's not good for the families." You know, and sort of this- this ethical and moral argument to, sort of even later on, the women of... some women- some women don't mind it (laugh). Which I thought was, again, you know, this is-

Martin Yant (09:03):

Odd.

Marie Mayhew (09:03):

(laughs) Yeah, this is like, he's sort of the- the writer loses sort of the whistle blower status with that, in that it's like, you know, but the mor- the- the morally bankrupt women don't care about it, but there are a few women who really, who don't appreciate this happening. Um, which again, is- is sort of skewed way of looking at, uh, sexual harassment, but is also kind of showing that it's, underneath the veneered is not as altruistic as it's trying to be, is how I looked at it.

Marie Mayhew (09:34):

Um, what would be the reason that someone would want to bring this much attention to Gordon Massie? And I think that that's what I'm trying to dig into, or we- we're trying to dig into next.

Martin Yant (09:49):

Yeah, I think the target, from the very first letter, is more Gordon Massie than Mary Gillispie.

Marie Mayhew (10:00):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (10:02):

And then later, it kind of switches, uh, to make Mary Massie, uh, a target as well as... I mean, Mary Gillispie, as much as- as Gordon Massie. And... but then, of course, it ends up with supposed, uh, attempted murder.

Marie Mayhew (10:33):

Yes. Yes.

Martin Yant (10:35):

And there's something going on here, that I think it's kind of hard to fathom, but I really am thinking that I should try to talk to some people.

Marie Mayhew (10:51):

Mm-hmm (affirmative). You know, and without, you know, having to examine some more of, you know, trying to gather some more facts about what was happening in Circleville during this time, what was happening in the school district during this time, which is- which is a little difficult, because it is now the '70s. Which doesn't seem that- that terribly long to- to you or I, but I'm sure (laughs) to- to some people, it's- it's already ancient history that they're reading about.

Martin Yant (11:21):

Ancient history, yeah.

Marie Mayhew (11:21):

(laughs) That they're reading about... I was going to say in textbooks, but nobody even really reads textbooks anymore.

Martin Yant (11:27):

How old are you?

Marie Mayhew (11:27):

Oh my God, Martin, I am- I am a crone. I'm a crone. Um, I'm telling you, I'm- I'm old enough- I'm old enough to- to know that the- that the '70s... to remember the '70s, but to know that they, you know, that some- a good time- a good amount of time has passed in between now and then (laughs). Um, but I would say that it-it's- it would be... it's hard to find out what's happening because of that.

Marie Mayhew (11:54):

But, um, and I think I sent you, and I'll- I'll tell the listeners, the email... so, again, trying to find records from this time period is- is difficult, because everything is... nothing is really digital, and everything's on Microfiche. And trying to find... I made a request recently, and the person got back to me and said, "We- we- we want to be able to provide that for you. It's going to take some time, because the Microfiche is in someone's, um, safety deposit box somewhere..."

Martin Yant (12:26):

(laughs) Yeah.

Marie Mayhew (12:26):

(laughs) "So we have to..."

Martin Yant (12:29):

But I'm impressed how people are going out of their way to try to help people.

Marie Mayhew (12:36):

I am too. I think- I think it speaks-

Martin Yant (12:39):

See, when I did this...

Marie Mayhew (12:40):

(laughs)

Martin Yant (12:41):

... the wounds for all were still pretty fresh.

Marie Mayhew (12:44):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (12:45):

And Paul Freshour was still in prison, uh, he was still being accused of writing these threatening letters. And then Paul had been making accusations against the sheriffs and others. So emotions were still pretty raw in 1992.

Marie Mayhew (13:09):

Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (13:10):

And now, it's kind of ancient history.

Marie Mayhew (13:15):

Yes. As ancient as 19- as ancient as the '70s, yes. But agreed. Agreed.

Martin Yant (13:19):

Now, one thing... now, another person I could talk to, he's a brilliant forensic scientist, and I quite often get him involved in cases, he's been involved in several wrongful conviction cases, um... but he's also a profiler. In general, I'm not a big fan of profilers who think they can tell you-

Marie Mayhew (13:43):

Right.

Martin Yant (13:44):

... what kind of person to look for-

Marie Mayhew (13:45):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (13:46):

... who would match this- the killer, because what they don't tell you is they're quite often way off the mark, and they bury those cases, and only tell you the ones where they- they were close.

Marie Mayhew (13:59):

(laughs) Yeah.

Martin Yant (14:00):

But- but he's a contrarian type of profiler, uh, who looks at things differently.

Marie Mayhew (14:10):

Oh, well you had me at contrarian, so. (laughs)

Martin Yant (14:14):

And I think I could run it by him, and just... I mean, it's amazing. He does what he calls... I think he calls it a forensic autopsy-

Marie Mayhew (14:24):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (14:24):

... and looks at all the crime scene stuff, everything else.

Marie Mayhew (14:28):

Hmm.

Martin Yant (14:28):

And then he'll develop an idea of who the killer is.

Marie Mayhew (14:32):

Hmm.

Martin Yant (14:33):

W-what kind of person is it. But I have no doubt he's a genius, because his mind, he's just always... he- he's almost Sherlockian.

Marie Mayhew (14:43):

(laughs)

Martin Yant (14:44):

And, you know, and he'll go into a crime scene, and one good example was that- of that is the, um, West Memphis Three-

Marie Mayhew (14:54):

Oh my goodness, yes.

Martin Yant (14:55):

... case.

Marie Mayhew (14:55):

Yes.

Martin Yant (14:57):

Well, he- he helped turn that around, because he, just looking at the autopsy photos, and what they were identifying as insight- insect bites, he said, "Those aren't insect bites. Those are bite marks."

Marie Mayhew (15:12):

Oh my God.

Martin Yant (15:14):

So he's very perceptive like that. Um...

Marie Mayhew (15:19):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (15:19):

But he might be able to, if nothing else, give some enlightening or entertaining insights on what kind of person this might be.

Marie Mayhew (15:31):

I- e- I think that that would be great. I mean... I don't know.

Martin Yant (15:35):

And then I think what I've got to do is... a couple of things.

Marie Mayhew (15:41):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (15:42):

And then, I thought I would try to track down and see if Gordon Massie's son-

Marie Mayhew (15:47):

Mm-hmm (affirmative). William.

Martin Yant (15:49):

... is still alive, because many people-

Marie Mayhew (15:52):

He is.

Martin Yant (15:52):

... have a theory that he did it.

Marie Mayhew (15:54):

I think he is. He's still in Circleville. I think it would be interesting to know what he thought of things. What- what he thought was happening during this time period, in 1977.

Martin Yant (16:12):

Yeah, and his father's long gone.

Marie Mayhew (16:14):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (16:16):

This is a real mystery, and it may plague him too.

Marie Mayhew (16:20):

I think- I think it's interesting, because one of the questions that I have is, did- did the letter writer send things to his home, to Gordon Massie's home? Or to Gordon Massie's wife, Clara?

Martin Yant (16:36):

Yeah.

Marie Mayhew (16:36):

We don't know, because none of those letters have ever been... they're not in any of the police records that I have found. They're- they're not referenced. But at the start of this, I didn't know that he had written, or the writer had written directly to Gordon Massie, either. So I'm curious to... I would be curious to know what, um, you know, if anything the Massie family would want to disclose about this, because I do think it's...

Marie Mayhew (17:09):

You know, again, he's being accused of something in these letters. You know, trial by- trial by rumor, in some ways, because there is- there are- there is no proof of any of this. There is no proof that he was anything but a, you know, a very good superintendent. He served as a superintendent in Westfall, and as- and a principal, and, you know, in that community for decades.

Marie Mayhew (17:38):

So it's- it's one of those things where it's like we've also made assumptions on someone's character with only knowing a portion of the truth, or what we think is the truth. And that's what I was sort of curious to find out next, is like, here's what I think I know about Gordon Massie, but what really happened with that? What was- what was the-

Martin Yant (18:00):

Yeah.

Marie Mayhew (18:01):

... what was the story with- with what was happening?

Martin Yant (18:03):

Well, then the other person-

Marie Mayhew (18:05):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Martin Yant (18:05):

... to be interviewed is Mary Gillispie.

Marie Mayhew (18:09):

Yeah. I can't find her (laughs). In any of my searches, I cannot... I can't find [inaudible 00:18:17].

Martin Yant (18:16):

I think I still have her. I'm pretty such I can locate her.

Marie Mayhew (18:23):

Well, I- I- yes. You- you're a professional. (laughs) I am a- I would- I would- I- I think that would be great.

Martin Yant (18:31):

But I'm really beginning to think this could make a fascinating book.

Marie Mayhew (18:36):

Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. I think that this... I think that the more- the more we find out, the more we can actually trace back a lot of these- a lot of these letters, and kind of dig into what was going on. Find out what was going on in the town, and start to piece more of a picture together of-

Martin Yant (19:00):

Yeah.

Marie Mayhew (19:00):

... this is what's happening. This is what happened in the '70s, and then this is what happened in the '80s, as t-there was a resurgence.

Martin Yant (19:07):

Yeah.

Marie Mayhew (19:07):

That- that-

Martin Yant (19:08):

Well, um... are you willing to co-write it with me?

Marie Mayhew (19:15):

(laughs) Am I going on the record of saying I would? Of course, I would. Of course. Of course. I mean, to me-

Martin Yant (19:19):

Maybe I can launch your literary career.

Marie Mayhew (19:23):

(laughs) Um, I would- I love- I would love to do something like that. I feel like- I feel like there are... one of my friends, when, um, uh, Forrest Burgess, when I told him I was doing... he- he is the co-host of Ast-Astonishing Legends Podcast. Um, when I told him I was-

Martin Yant (19:40):

What is it, legends?

Marie Mayhew (19:41):

Astonishing Legends. So he is... they- they cover all sorts of... him and his good friend, uh, Scott Philbrook, um, have a- have a wonderful podcast, that covers the gamut of all sorts of strange history, strange science. Um, and they've done really- they've done really wonderful work. And when I told him I was doing- I was doing the, uh, the Circleville Letters, he was like, "Uh, isn't that kind of done? Like haven't you- haven't you- everybody's covered that. Everyone knows everything that there is to know about that. That's like an episode and a half."

Martin Yant (20:13):

No. No, they don't.

Marie Mayhew (20:14):

And I was like, "Nah." (laughs)

Martin Yant (20:16):

It's... most [crosstalk 00:20:16]

Marie Mayhew (20:16):

Clearly. Yeah.

Martin Yant (20:18):

They took my stories-

Marie Mayhew (20:23):

Uh-huh.

Martin Yant (20:23):

... and the Unsolved Mysteries, and then they piled on all kinds of speculation.

Marie Mayhew (20:28):

And I think- I think that that... that was my point back to him, is I was like, "I don't know, man". The more, you know, the idea of- of this contagion kind of taking over this town, and then nobody really knowing who it was, or how, or what happened or why it happened, was what fascinated me to begin with. But then, the more you start to dig into the people, and, you know, what was- what was happening in their lives, and- and how it was effecting them, I think it's... I think there's a lot too it. I would love to be able to go deeper into it.

Marie Mayhew (21:07):

So this wraps up our first interview with private investigator, Martin Yant, who we thank for giving us his guidance and insight on this mystery. We'll be speaking with hi again in the coming weeks about what we unearth next in Circleville. Be sure to check out his great books, Rotten To The Core, and Presumed Guilty: When Innocent People Are Wrongly Convicted, amongst others. So until our next episode, remember, what goes around comes around. And thank you for listening.

Marie Mayhew (21:36):

What to know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on Twitter @WhateverRemains, or online at whateverremainspodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show, and give us a five star review on iTunes, or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Copyright, Five Orange Pips Production. All rights reserved.

Speaker 1 (22:16):

(singing)

WELCOME TO CIRCLEVILLE - Episode 1: The First 3 Letters

Marie Mayhew:

On a cold, overcast spring day in March 1977, in a small rural town in Ohio, Mary Gillespie opened her front door and started to trek to her mailbox. The Gillespie, on Brookmiller Road, sat in isolation. Surrounded by farmland and trees, their closest neighbors were miles down the road. It was a remote area. To retrieve their mail, Mary would have had to a waled a few hundred feet to their mailbox, positioned just a few feet off of Brookmiller Road. The walk itself probably would have only taken less than seven minutes. But on that cold March day, between the rain and the snow, it would have been enough time to just have been a kind of quite reprieve for Mary to gather her thoughts, maybe just to catch her breath. A moment of peace.

Marie Mayhew:

Mary, her husband Ron, and their daughter, Tracy, would get all kind of mail. Bills, family letters, holiday cars, promotions, mail like any other family in the town of Circleville, Ohio. But on that day, in 1977, what was waiting for Mary at the end of that long walk to the mailbox was different. It was a letter postmarked from Columbus, Ohio with no return address. Written on a single sheet of paper in slanted, blocky handwriting was this.

Terrance Jenkins.:

Stay away from Massie. Don't lie when asked about knowing him. I know where you live and have observing your house and know you have children. This is no joke. Please take it serious. Everyone concerned has been notified and everything will be over soon.

Marie Mayhew:

Standing alone in the early spring quite by her mailbox on Brookmiller Road, one can only imagine the sudden unease Mary must have felt as those word sank in. On that rural road, in the open, she wasn't alone with her thoughts. Someone was there with her.

Marie Mayhew:

Letter in hand, turning away from the open road, she starts back to the shelter of her house, quickening her pace.

Marie Mayhew:

This letter, the one she received in March 1977, is the first of over 40 anonymous letters, sent and received, over the span of a decade. Handwritten in that strange blocky uppercase lettering, this ongoing correspondence was mysterious, belittling, threatening, and would ultimately end with an attempt on Mary's life.

Marie Mayhew:

Thank you for listening to Whatever Remains Podcast. I'm your host Marie Mayhew. This episode, we arrive in the small town of Circleville, Ohio.

Marie Mayhew:

Beginning in 1977, Mary Gillespie and other residents of Circleville, Ohio began to receive anonymous letters. And not just a few trickling in here or there but thousands of letters and accused the citizens of the small town of being involved in some pretty terrible things. Embezzlement, domestic violence, affairs, and even murder. Letter after letter, year after year, this anonymous author was hellbent to expose every ugly litter secret in Circleville. The writer was relentless, but the real scary thing was that a lot of these accusations contained some very particular, and accurate personal information, exposing some of the most private details from people's lives. It was that this anonymous author knew their subject and knew them well. They could have been a friend, a neighbor, or maybe even family. The person putting that much venom into people's mailbox wasn't some stranger, and they were certainly not planning on stopping or even slowing down.

Marie Mayhew:

This anonymous writer wasn't just content to turn over every rock in the private lives of Circleville citizens just to see what squirmed out, they wanted something. And in 1983, after a decade of mailing malice and threats, they would try and kill Mary Gillespie to get it. But who was the Circleville writer and what were they trying to achieve? How could just one person possibly know so much about the private lives of the residents and keep it up for decades?

Marie Mayhew:

And in 1990, when someone was finally arrested. Did the police ultimately catch the right person? On this season of Whatever Remains, we untangle a decades worth of police records, hundreds of pages of court transcripts from the trial of Paul Freshour, the man ultimately convicted of these crimes. We read the letter themselves, some of them not made public in years, and try and track their origins. We'll learn more about lives of the people of Circleville that lived under this shadow for years, and how these letters wore at this community. And we'll talk to law enforcement officers and a private investigator, who is still working to solve this ongoing mystery. But beyond the attempted murder of Mary Gillespie, there were other brutal unsolved deaths that the Circleville letter writer appeared to know about. Were they in some way responsible or were they trying to seek justice? We'll try to figure out who was behind the Circleville letters, the anonymous writer with a grudge to bear on one small town and what could have been their reason for flooding Circleville with so much malice?

Marie Mayhew:

Circleville, Ohio is a beautiful, peaceful, small town. Population, a bit over 13,000. There's more than 80 cities in the state of Ohio that are larger. So in earnest, it really, truly is a small town. But one a year, the town swells to over 400,000 people as they all swarm there for the Circleville Pumpkin Show, a three day extravaganza celebrating that one orange gourd. But Circleville, Ohio is exceptional because it appears to be perfectly ordinary. Imagine a serene snow globe of a town and that's Circleville.

Marie Mayhew:

Now if you know anything about small towns or like me, if you grew up in one, Circleville may conjure up images of family and friends, the sense of connection to a community, holiday festivities, birthdays, school dances, parades, maybe all in all a bit bland but comforting secure times. But there's also an uneasy feeling with small towns, a vivid sense that it's too small and cloying, too perfect. It doesn't even really matter how fond these warm memories are, something about that small town, even though it's so familiar, isn't inviting you to stay. You could even argue the opposite. There's something in that small town that isn't right, it's just not safe.

Marie Mayhew:

Small towns tend to have big secrets, buried deep under those freshly mown lawns. This trope of something being not quite right in the small town is famous and highly popular. David Lynch in Twin Peaks. Stephen King in Derry. Even Harper Lee in To Kill a Mockingbird. This one simple idea of the small town gone bad is the basis for endless entertainment and we love it. We crave digging up those dark little horrors, we wanna know everything. That is until we do. Start turning over those rocks and there is no telling what could crawl out.

Marie Mayhew:

And like those stories we crave, something pretty disturbing happened in Circleville, starting small, flourishing over decades. It began quietly in 1977. The first set of letters would become the origin story, the groundwork for all the later events that happened in Circleville. 1977 was the town's first real exposure to this virus. The anonymous letters started to make their way into people's mailboxes on March 2, 1977, and they were not sent to Mary Gillespie. In fact, she wasn't even the subject of them. Surprisingly, the first letter was sent to Westfall High School, to the attention of Gordon Massie.

Marie Mayhew:

Gordon Massie was the school superintendent for Westfall, and had a long career in Ohio's School Districts, first as a principal and then as local school superintendent. School superintendent is a pretty big roll, especially in a small town in the '70s. If a school is corporation, then the superintendent is the CEO. They're responsible for all major events, good or bad, and for image of the brand of that school. Much of what a superintendent's actual job is, is building support from other groups within a school. So they have to be very tight with the parents of the students, the community, and even the local government.

Marie Mayhew:

And while the superintendent runs the school, the Board of Education is in charge of the superintendent for the District. Just like the board of a corporation, the Board of Education has oversight for that superintendent. The big responsibility of a superintendent is making recommendations about operations for that District. Things like staffing decisions for teachers, monetary investments, things like that. But maybe even more important, it's the superintendent role to keep the Board informed of events or happenings in that District that could have an impact on them, the school the people themselves.

Marie Mayhew:

And like a corporation, the Board can fire a superintendent should they think they are effective at doing their job. For a small town superintendent, whose job it is to avoid issues and keep their peace in their district, receiving the first letter must have detonated like a bomb in Gordon Massie's hands. Written in a cramped small print, alternating between upper and lower case, it alleges that Massie was sexually harassing the women's school bus drives at Westfall High School.

Terrance Jenkins.:

Letter one. Mailed from Columbus, Ohio on March 2, 1977. Addressed to Westfall High School. Attention Superintendent Massie. No return address. Dear Sir. According to my girlfriend, you have asked her to go out many times and have asked the other female bus drivers too. Due to your position and their jobs with you, you should not do this. This must stop at once for the good of the school and families. If they are not stopped, I will be forced to write to the school board, and I'd hate to do that. To prey on another man's girl is untouchable, especially when their out trying to make a living. There's also talk of you dating a married woman and taking advantage of them. Do you need time and names again? Please think. I suggest you find yourself a pimple-faced whore and start up with her and leave my girls alone.

Marie Mayhew:

The letter writer is saying that he knows this is happening because Massie has asked out his girlfriend but seems to believe that he needs to stop because it's not good for families or the school. These women are trying to make a living and if Massie doesn't stop immediately, he'll the one thing that every superintendent's job is to avoid. He'll go straight to the school board. But were the allegations in the letter true? And if they were, how did the letter writer know? Were they really the boyfriend of one of the public school drivers at Westfall? Maybe most importantly, what does the letter writer want? Then just a mere two days later.

Terrance Jenkins.:

Addressed to Westfall High School. Attention Board of Education. No return address. Dear School Board. This is to inform you that you have several dissatisfied female drivers due to their working relations with their boss. He dates a lot of the drivers. One, because she's afraid to because of her job and because of his position. He constantly asks several of them over and over. No one ever stops him. He will not take no for an answer from a couple of them. It even bothers some that he has not asked. They would like the chance to tell him where to go. Under these circumstances, they cannot be treated equally. He picks on the weaker ones constantly. This is a terrible working condition and must be stopped for the sake of the schools and the families involved. Again, you should investigate. He has dated several of them. Before long, we'll start repeating the rounds all over again, causing on some more hardships and others, a low morale problem. Some have even considering a bargaining unit for job protection. He's a nice guy on the outside, but please talk to your drivers independently for the full facts of how he is to work for. Please talk to them and treat the problem. Some are nervous and shouldn't be driving under additional pressure as this. After me writing this letter, I sure hope he does not upset my girl for his sake.

Marie Mayhew:

The letter is sent to the same address from Columbus, but this time attention to the Board of Education. The handwriting here is moving towards script and is neater, more uniform, as if the writer needs to present themselves more respectfully to this audience. Sexual harassment should be reported and deal with full stop, and these accusations are serious. If you, your girlfriend, a loved one, is the target of this or witness, if they have to work in it, then the anger is understanded and warranted. The writer is calling out a systematic abuse that would not become part of our nation's discourse, well, til pretty much now. But if you were serious about bringing this wrongdoing to light, then why write Gordon Massey at all? Why warn him that this was coming? Why not contact the Board of Education directly? If the writer fears repercussion for making these accusations, then why make threats?

Marie Mayhew:

The timing of when these two letters were sent, begs the question about the writer's ultimate motivation. Clearly, two days between Gordon Massie's receiving the first letter and the School Board receiving the second, is not a lot of time for Massie to take any real recourse of action. He wouldn't have had time to formulate a plan, to reach out to the School Board and warn them. He would have been in some level of just recoil. Two days is just enough time for Gordon Massie to start to understand how bad of a predicament he was in. And the letter writer, whoever it was, was just getting started.

Terrance Jenkins.:

Letter three. Mailed from Columbus, Ohio on March 4, 1977. Addressed to Westfall High School. Attention Superintendent of Schools. No return address. Dear Superintendent. This is to inform you several of your bus drivers are working under pressure due to their boss constantly putting the moves on them. Some like it. The decent ones don't. Is he getting paid to run the women or run the bus lines? Again, some move behind him because they need the attention and are weak. Should this position be filled by someone capable of taking advantage of his job, school and people that work for him? Is this the type of family man that we need in a position such as this? Capable of using working women because of his advantages. One woman dates him because of her job. This is a terrible working relations and something must be done about it. Most of the drivers know what is going on constantly. You should talk to them and also him before something drastic happens.

Terrance Jenkins.:

For he cares not if they are married or single. Could he be allowed to hound them constantly? I was informed at first by a close friend and refused to believe it. But she proved it through several other friends. I told them to take this matter to someone but so far they have not. It's only a few but they still should count too. I can prove this and will if her school insists on it. I feel that at first he should be talked to and the drivers also. I will find out through the grapevine if he has been put in line. I know of his affairs now and can prove it, and will do so if he continues harassing drivers for dates. Especially when they keep saying no and he constantly hounds them.

Terrance Jenkins.:

I have met him and he seems like a sincere man. So I would like to see this matter made right and forgotten. I can't stand the thought of him thinking about this. One of these drivers, or especially my girl, which I am sure makes no difference to him. I am being informed of him daily and can point out the last drivers he has been with. I shall prove it to you. Again he needs talking to so this matter can be forgotten. Give the drivers a break. Help them. Find out for yourself. Treat all equal. Friends of concerned drivers that are in fear. I have always been against school tax dollars bonuses because of their purpose and won't pay it unless correction and action has been taken.

Marie Mayhew:

Sent on the same day as the one to the School Board but to a superintendent in a different district. This letter is moving beyond concern. The writer wants toe harassment stopped and for the bus drivers to be heard, but it's also alleging that some of these women don't mind being sexual harassed, some even like it. Needless to say, that is not the case. There also some menace to it, that they will find out through the grapevine if Gordon Massie has been put in line. In these first three letter from the anonymous letter writer, there's not return address or identity of who the author is. The closest we come here is that they are mailed from Columbus, Ohio, Postal Hub 430.

Marie Mayhew:

But there are definite signatures. The letter writer's beginning aren't about Mary Gillespie, the women who would soon become the writer's target. It starts with pushing to make sure that one man, Gordon Massie, would be very scared, to be sure that he knew that even though he was a supposed well respected school superintendent, with his picture in the paper, he wasn't in control. If what this letter writer was saying was true, his family, his job, his reputation was over. And he couldn't do anything to stop it. All Gordon Massie could do now, is wait by his mailbox.

Marie Mayhew:

Thank you for listening to the Whatever Remains Podcast. I'm your host, Marie Mayhew. Our next episode, The Letters Keep Coming, and we introduce you to the story's other main players in the town of Circleville, Ohio.

Marie Mayhew:

(singing)

Marie Mayhew:

So until our next episode, dear listeners, remember, what goes around, comes around. Want to know what Whatever Remains is getting up to next? Follow us on twitter @whateverremains or online at whateverremainspodcast.com. Be sure to subscribe to the show and give us a five-star review on iTunes or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. Your review helps others to find the show and we love, love, love hearing from our listeners, so please, please reach out. Our intro music is by the fabulous group Rhoda. Our new closing song for Circleville is vocals and guitar by the Rock God, Ed Grabianowski. Produced by Rich Root. Excellent, excellent cover, love it. The all seeing eye or our logo is by the super talented [Desdemona]. This episode features the voice talents of Terrence Jenkins as the anonymous letter writer. Copyright Five Orange Pips Production, all rights reserved.