13x11 - Stranger in the Night

[bunniefuu]

Up next, police
hear an incredible story.

He made the statement, "I
can't believe he k*lled her."

A man claims his
mother was m*rder*d by a

hitchhiker he picked up.

And then, all of a sudden, he
ends up at your house, and your

mother's dead.

Only an idiot would believe
that story.

The son says he's
telling the truth but refuses to

take a polygraph.

What does he have to hide?

We have proof.

What proof?

Can forensic
science provide the answers?

This is probably one of the
most bizarre cases I've been

involved in.

Shortly after
midnight, Charles Holden

returned home from work and saw
a suspicious-looking man lurking

outside the home he shared with
his mother.

Instead of confronting the
man, he drove to a pay phone and

called police.

When police
arrived, they discovered a

window had been broken on the
back door of his mother's

farmhouse.

Inside, they found the man's
mother, 70-year-old

Dorothy Donovan, dead in her
bedroom.

It was a very bloody and
brutal crime scene... blood

everywhere, blood splatters
throughout the bedroom.

She had been
stabbed repeatedly in the chest

and face.

This is what I would consider
to be overkill.

And this can suggest that this
is a person that has a close

relationship with the person and
knows that person and is very

intimate... could possibly be
intimate with that person.

But the way the
body was arranged, it looked

like the victim had been
sexually assaulted.

But the medical examiner found
no evidence of it.

So this made investigators
think that maybe the way the

body was found, that maybe the
scene had been staged.

There were no
valuables missing from the

house, and Dorothy's purse was
untouched.

So that ruled out the robbery
motive or a possible theft gone

bad.

Um, so that in itself also...
You're trying to figure out

why... why this happened.

Why was this lady k*lled when
nothing was taken?

Dorothy Donovan,
twice widowed with seven

grandchildren, was an unlikely
victim of v*olence, and her

family said she had no known
enemies.

It was a very safe farming
community.

People knew each other.

Lots of people didn't even lock
their doors.

Dorothy's grown
son, Charles, who had called

police to the scene, made an
unusual comment when he saw his

mother's body.

He made the statement, "I
can't believe he k*lled her.

I can't believe he k*lled her."

And Charles now told
investigators that he knew the

man walking outside his mother's
home.

He said it was someone who had
asked him for a ride earlier

that night and got angry when he
refused.

Charles claimed he might have
k*lled his mother for revenge.

Those things just don't
happen... that you would pick up

a hitchhiker, and then all of a
sudden, he ends up at your house

and your mother's dead.

I let him go through his
story and took it all down.

At that point, I really wasn't
buying into it.

Police now question
whether this man even existed.

When police found


brutally m*rder*d in her
Delaware farmhouse, her son,

Charles, told police a story so
implausible, no one believed

him.

Charles claimed
that on the night of his

mother's m*rder, he worked the


factory job, then stopped on his
way home for a hamburger.

While walking to his truck, he
was approached by a man who was

looking for a ride to
Georgetown.

Charles said he wasn't going
that far but was headed in that

direction.

After driving a few miles,
Charles told the man that was as

far as he was going and that
he'd have to get out.

Charles said this because he
lived just a half mile away and

didn't want the hitchhiker to
know which house was his.

But the man became angry.

Charles got out of his truck.

The hitchhiker grabbed a
screwdriver he found on the

floor, and the fight continued
outside.

Charles claimed the man
threatened to k*ll him if he

didn't drive him the whole way.

So Charles agreed.

As they made their way back to
the truck, Charles got in first.

Charles was able to pull away
before the hitchhiker could get

to the passenger side of the
vehicle.

He drove off, leaving the
hitchhiker standing in the

intersection.

Shaken by the
experience, Charles said he

drove around for awhile instead
of going straight home.

He doesn't want to go right
home because he's afraid that

the hitchhiker's gonna see him
and know where he lives.

About 20 minutes
later, Charles drove up the

driveway to his home, and to his
shock and surprise, he saw the

hitchhiker walking around his
property.

That's when he went to call
police.

The type of w*apon was never
conclusively determined by the

medical examiner... just that it
was a cutting instrument.

It could have been consistent
with a screwdriver or a knife.

There are a lot of things
going through investigators'

minds, thinking, you know, the
story that Charles Holden is

telling is just not really
adding up.

When Charles was
finished with his story, police

gave him their unvarnished
opinion.

Gave him their unvarnished
opinion.

And how did the
hitchhiker know where Charles

lived?

After all, there were other
homes in the area, and the

hitchhiker not only had to walk
a half mile, he also would have

had to make a turn in the road.

This story was so difficult
to believe because how did this

person pick this house... number
one?

And picking this house, why did
he go in and k*ll this person

that was laying in bed?

He was certainly taken aback
by my accusation that he had

something to do with his
mother's death.

But I felt that's the way the
interview needed to go because

it just didn't seem logical or
likely that the events that he

was describing actually took
place.

And investigators
also discovered a possible

financial motive.

Shortly before Dorothy's
m*rder, Dorothy had taken out an

accidental-death insurance
policy, and Charles was named

the beneficiary of that policy.

Charles Holden did have some
financial problems at the time

of this incident with some
farming debt that he had

incurred over the past year, and
this was benefiting him so that

he could pay off those debts.

Even more
incriminating, Charles, who had

no criminal record, refused to
take a polygraph.

What does he have to hide?

If he truly doesn't have
anything to do with his mother's

death, why not take it?

Anytime someone refuses to
take a polygraph, that always

adds suspicion to that
individual.

What's he trying to hide?

Maybe he didn't k*ll his mother,
but maybe he knew who did.

It didn't take long
for investigators to find

evidence at the crime scene...
Evidence left by the k*ller.

Evidence at the crime scene...
Evidence left by the k*ller.

That proof was left
on the handrail of Dorothy's

farmhouse.

There was a bloody palm print
on the railing, which turned out

to be the most important clue of
this case.

There were other
bloody fingerprints in the

farmhouse, but those weren't as
clear.

It was a good print, even
though it was slightly

fragmented.

It was not the entire palm.

It was only a small section of a
palm print.

When investigators
compared the bloody palm print

to Charles' prints, they got an
unpleasant surprise.

The palm print was compared
to Charles Holden's known

prints, and it was not a match.

Investigators now
had to face the possibility that

Charles' story might actually be
true.

Investigators still
believe Charles Holden had

something to do with his
mother's m*rder and may have

hired someone to k*ll her.

Even though there was the
forensic evidence that didn't

match Charles Holden, there
could have been some connection

between Charles Holden and the
person who committed the m*rder.

Investigators
suspected that the hired k*ller

might have been the man with
Charles at the fast-food

restaurant.

Detectives went back, and
they were able to locate some of

the people who were in the
parking lot that night, and they

were able to find that there
was, in fact, a black male

walking through the parking lot,
looking for a ride, and actually

did see this person get in the
car with Charles.

Investigators asked
Charles to describe the

hitchhiker, and from that
description, police created this

composite sketch.

The large glasses were the most
distinctive part of the image.

Investigators looked for
criminals who fit this

description and put together a
photo lineup.

Charles picked an individual
by the name of Richard Mitchell

out of this lineup.

Also, three other witnesses from
the hardee's that night also

picked out Richard Mitchell as
the hitchhiker.


Richard Mitchell looked

remarkably like the composite
drawing, and he'd been arrested

a number of times for forgery
and petty theft.

We were pretty optimistic
that we had found the person

that might have committed this
crime.

Investigators found
Mitchell at his home in

harrington, Delaware, and they
knew immediately this was a dead

end.

As soon as I saw
Richard Mitchell, I knew he was

not our guy.

He had a full beard, and the
suspect we were looking for was

clean-shaven.

Furthermore,
Mitchell's palm prints didn't

match the print from the crime
scene.

He also had an alibi.

As it turned out, he was not
our man.

Back at the crime
scene, investigators found

another clue.

Blood on the light switch in the
victim's living room was not the

victim's blood...

Presumably, it belonged to the
k*ller.

He could have cut his hand on
the door when he broke the glass

to reach in to unlock the door
to get into the house.

A sample of the
blood was sent to the FBI's

forensic lab, which confirmed it
didn't belong to the victim's

son, Charles, or any of the
other suspects in the case.

It certainly is a frustrating
situation when you know you have

good evidence and you just can't
match it up.

It was very frustrating.

You have a lot of anger.

You have so many questions.

Despite his
denials, suspicions remained

that Charles Holden still might
have had something to do with

his mother's m*rder.

Even though several witnesses
had corroborated

Charles Holden's story about
this hitchhiker, investigators

still felt as though the story
was too unbelievable to have

happened the way Charles was
saying, and I thought that

Charles may still have been
involved in this incident.

More than 10 years
after the m*rder, the state of

Delaware was able to access
codis, a national DNA database

of criminal offenders.

"Codis" stands for the
"combined DNA index system" and

is actually a software suite.

And what it does is it blends
forensic science and computer

technology to aid in
investigations of crime.

And when the FBI
entered the DNA profile of

Dorothy Donovan's k*ller, they
finally got a match.

This was our home-run hit, if
you will.

It was great.

We were ecstatic.

I really couldn't believe it.

It was only in there for one
week, and now she's calling me

back and telling me that,
already, we have a match.

The DNA matched a
career criminal named

Gilbert Cannon, who was living
in Delaware at the time of

Dorothy's m*rder.

In the interim, he had served
time in prison for drug and

robbery charges but had been
released.

But by this time, no one seemed
to know where he was or even if

he was still alive.

A DNA database
match identified Gilbert Cannon,

a career criminal, as
Dorothy Donovan's k*ller.

He bore a striking resemblance
to the composite drawing created

more than a decade earlier.

They got some mug sh*ts of
him from back in the early '90s,

and they were able to compare
those mug sh*ts to drawings of

the suspect.

They matched quite well with
what Gilbert Cannon had looked

like back around 1990, '91.

By the time
investigators identified Cannon

as the source of the DNA at
Dorothy Donovan's crime scene,

he had been released from prison
for a robbery conviction, and no

one knew where he was.

Eventually, police found him at
a girlfriend's house, just 40

miles from Dorothy Donovan's
farmhouse.

It took us about 2 1/2 months
to finally locate

Gilbert Cannon.

But Cannon
adamantly denied any involvement

in the m*rder.

Investigators knew Cannon's DNA
was at the crime scene, but they

also took his finger and palm
prints for comparison.

I had suggested that, when
they took it, to make sure they

rolled the palm toward the
outside to cover any of the area

we may need in question.

Rod hegman compared
this fresh print to the print on

the handrail in
Dorothy Donovan's house.

The result was clear... the
print belonged to

Gilbert Cannon, and he was
confronted with the evidence

against him.

A few hours later, Cannon
reconsidered.

He knocked on the window of
the holding cell and advised

investigators that he wanted to
talk to investigators.

Cannon told police
that on the night of the m*rder,

he was high on cocaine and
looking for more.

And that's when he ran into
Charles Holden at the fast-food

restaurant.

I really need a ride to
Georgetown.

Well, I can't take you as far
as Georgetown, but I'll take you

to the turnpike.

Thank you, man.

Appreciate it.

Holden agreed to
give him a ride but refused to

take Cannon all the way into
town.

There was a fight.

Cannon found a screwdriver in
the truck, and the fight

continued outside.

Eventually, Charles Holden
agreed to drive Cannon the rest

of the way.

But Charles managed to get back
into the truck first and took

off.

Cannon said he had no choice
but to walk down the road in the

same direction.

He said he passed a few houses,
but they all had lights on.

Looking for a place to sleep, he
stopped at the first house that

looked empty.

When he broke in through the
back door...

He woke the homeowner,
Dorothy Donovan.

Who's down there?

Who's that downstairs?

Charles?

Cannon was afraid
she'd be able to identify him,

so he used the screwdriver he
took from Charles' truck and

stabbed Charles' mother to
death in a drug-fueled rage.

He left his palm print and DNA
inside the home.

Charles saw him on the property
and called police, convinced

that Cannon had somehow followed
him.

Cannon claims it was just a
coincidence that he chose

Dorothy's house.

He was unaware of any connection
between Dorothy and Charles.

Investigators asked him if
anyone else was with him, if he

knew Charles Holden.

Did anyone ask him to do it?

And his response to
investigators was "no," that he

acted alone.

When they told Cannon that
Charles was my mother's son, he

was totally surprised.

That was such a relief to us.

That showed us that Charles was
not connected with him.

In the face of a
possible death sentence,

Gilbert Cannon pleaded guilty to
first-degree m*rder and was

sentenced to life without
parole.

We were just ecstatic.

I thank god.

I always believed that god
would... that god was there for

us, that justice would be found,
no matter how long it took.

The science proved
not only that Gilbert Cannon was

guilty but that Charles Holden,
a man kind enough to give a ride

to a stranger, had nothing to do
with his mother's m*rder.

Charles Holden was exonerated
because of the advancements in

the computer technology and the
forensic technology.

This is probably one of the
most bizarre cases I've been

involved in just because of
the... what you thought were

conflicting stories at the
beginning.

Being able to provide them
some closure, you know, with the

help of science and codis and
the state police is incredible.

If the police had not done
such a really outstanding job in

pursuing this for so many years,
that Cannon would probably still

be walking free.