Last Podcast On The Left
Last Podcast On The Left
"Albert DeSalvo had the perfect cocktail to be rapist slash murderer. A serial rapist, definitely." — Marcus Parks
"The idea was to keep him from being executed. Yeah. They didn't want him to be, they didn't want to get the death sentence. So the way he kind of figured it is is like, not only will you be able to call him the Boston Strangler and pin all the crimes at him, but what we can't do is use that as evidence because they will give him the death sentence." — Ben Kissel
"He was stabbed to death in jail in 1973. Yes. And they basically got, sort of receiving calls, F. Lee Bailey and his family, sort of receiving calls, being like, you gotta get me out of here, you gotta get me out of here, I gotta, I gotta talk to you guys about something, there's something for you guys to know about The Boston Strangler case. And it's getting really hard for me in here." — Henry Zebrowski
The episode meticulously dissects the multifaceted investigation into the Boston Strangler. It begins by highlighting the challenges faced by the authorities, including a lack of inter-departmental communication and the pressure to solve a high-profile case. The narrative explores the involvement of a Dutch mystic, Peter Herkos, who utilized psychometry to analyze crime scene artifacts, offering insights that were both intriguing and highly speculative. The episode then shifts focus to Albert DeSalvo, a convicted rapist, who eventually confessed to being the Boston Strangler. The hosts critically examine the evidence surrounding DeSalvo's confession, including his detailed accounts of the crimes, his photographic memory, and the dubious circumstances under which his confession was obtained.
A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the legal and media circus that surrounded DeSalvo's case. The role of his lawyer, F. Lee Bailey, is scrutinized, particularly the alleged deal struck to prevent DeSalvo's execution in exchange for his confession and cooperation, which would allow for lucrative media rights. The hosts question the reliability of DeSalvo's confession, citing inconsistencies in his statements, the lack of direct physical evidence linking him to all the crime scenes, and the possibility that he may have confessed to gain fame or a perceived status upgrade from serial rapist to serial killer. The episode also touches upon the theory that the Boston Strangler may have been multiple individuals, as suggested by inconsistencies in crime scene details and investigative findings.
Finally, the episode revisits the scientific advancements in forensics, noting a 2013 DNA test on a victim's remains that reportedly matched Albert DeSalvo. However, the hosts express skepticism regarding the finality of this evidence, pointing to previous failed DNA tests and the potential for institutional bias within the Boston Police Department to avoid admitting a past mistake. The episode concludes by emphasizing the lingering questions and the enduring mystery surrounding the true identity of the Boston Strangler, suggesting that the case remains unresolved despite DeSalvo's conviction.