PAUL HOLES: Interview Second half

BIO:

Paul is retired cold-case investigator known for his extensive work on serial predator crimes and for helping solve the Golden State Killer case using genetic genealogy. Paul spent 27 years working with the Contra Costa County (CA) sheriff and district attorney’s offices. With his experience in forensic and investigative techniques, Paul specialized in cold case and serial predator crimes such as the Zodiac killer, Golden State Killer, and the Jaycee Dugard cases. Paul is frequently sought out as a consultant on some of the most complex and high-profile cases and has played a part in putting several predators on death row, such as Darryl Kemp, Joseph Naso, and Joseph Cordova Jr.

While employed with the DA’s office as an FBI Task Force Officer, Paul teamed up with FBI and Sacramento DA personnel to apply innovative technology that identified Joseph DeAngelo as the Golden State Killer, the most prolific and cunning serial predator in U.S. history. Since the arrest of DeAngelo, Paul has been very involved on the media side, continuing to assist law enforcement and victim’s families with their unsolved cases, while also advocating for victims and mental health awareness in law enforcement. He has worked in media, including the television show “The DNA of Murder with Paul Holes” and HLN’s show “Real Life Nightmare.” Paul was also used as an expert for Fox’s reboot of “America’s Most Wanted” and is now co-host on two podcasts, “Buried Bones” and “Small Town Dicks.”

INTERVIEW:

LYNN: How do you manage so much information with regards to multiple cases? Do you have a system? Or is there some sort of software program now that helps investigators like you manage multiple files of information?

I do have a general system for organizing and managing case files, but some cases require different tools, if you will. Many people would be surprised how voluminous some case files are – well over several thousand pages long, along with many hundreds of photographs, etc. As a cold case investigator, many of the cases I have worked occurred well before the computer age, so the case files are handwritten or typed, and the photos are film based, so they are yellowed prints or just film negatives.

My general system for these types of cases is to first spend the time digitizing everything, which can be very time consuming. Once digital, the case file can be organized into logical sections. I then use the OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software that converts the scanned images into text. the written pages so I can keyword search a case file. This is an absolute time saver for the very large files. The photos are color corrected in Photoshop, and then I import them into PowerPoint. Once in PowerPoint, I can now organize them in a way that makes sense to me. Then I can start making my notes within the slides and correlating my observations with passages that I’ve snipped out of pathology, CSI, forensic, or investigative reports.

Over the years, I’ve seen examples of purpose-built software to help with organizing info out of case files, but I’m most familiar and comfortable with my own system.

LYNN: Beside the Golden State Killer Case, which case has given you the greatest satisfaction and why?

In December 1969, in Walnut Creek, CA, 17-year-old Elaine Davis was assigned to empty the dishwasher and sew a button on a pea coat while her mom went to pick up her dad from work at 11pm. When the parents come back about 30 minutes later, Elaine is gone. The button was found on the side of the street about a block away, and the pea coat was found on the side of a highway down by Santa Cruz. Elaine was never found.

Thirty-three years later, I worked with the lead investigator on Elaine’s case, and we determined that a badly decomposed body that had washed up on a Santa Cruz beach could be Elaine. This body had been buried as a Jane Doe in a Santa Cruz cemetery in an unmarked grave. Using a forensic anthropologist, we exhumed the body, and it was taken to the university where the anthropologist identified the remains as Elaine Davis.

The investigator notified Elaine’s mother that her daughter had been found. Elaine was given a proper burial, and mom died two weeks later, staying alive long enough to see her daughter buried. This case is still unsolved, but I’m proud of the efforts we made to get mom her daughter back.

LYNN: Which one got away, and how do you feel about it?

Between November 1998 and January 1999, four women were brutally killed in rapid succession. The first of the four was 15-year-old Lisa Norrell. In addition to going out to the scene where her body was found, I spent an entire day with Lisa’s body in the morgue and tried to do everything humanly possible in the lab to find evidence that could identify her killer.

I was also assigned to go to the scene of the fourth victim and process her body in the morgue. Nobody should experience the horrors that were done to the fourth victim. I recognized we were dealing with a sexual sadist serial killer and completely invested my entire being to find this monster.

These cases are still unsolved, but there’s a good chance I will have the chance to work on them again.

LYNN: If you could go back to those cases, how would you approach them differently?

At this point, I have a quarter of a century more experience studying serial predators than what I had when these cases occurred. There’s a multitude of resources that could have been tapped into earlier in the investigation if I could have been successful in convincing the agencies involved that they were dealing with a serial predator versus thinking of the four cases separately.

LYNN: When you’re investigating a case, especially a cold case, how often does it feel like you’re just going down a rabbit hole?

In an unsolved case, any investigative lead could be a rabbit hole, and they frequently occur. Each lead needs to be pursued up to the point where the information obtained suggests the lead is likely a dead end or another lead, more promising lead, has popped up. There have been leads I’ve pursued well longer than I should have, and I have learned to re-direct my efforts elsewhere versus being tunnel visioned on a bad lead.

LYNN: When that happens, do you have a process to get out of the hole?

I can’t say there is a process up and beyond learning to constantly re-assess the details that have been acquired against the evidence in the case. If that constant re-assessment isn’t done, then it is easy to keep going on the wrong track, and that is what often contributes to investigative failures. Dr. Kim Rossmo has an excellent article called “Criminal Investigative Failures.” I adopted his recommended mindset after I had an investigative failure that cost me two years pursuing a suspect in the Golden State Killer case.

LYNN: If you had to do it all over again, what would you change about your career?

My career path is unusual in that I was working in forensics but took on cold case investigations on the side (without my bosses knowing). Though I don’t deny that the broad forensic experience has helped me immensely as a cold case investigator, I wish I formally got involved on the investigative side much earlier than I did.

The other thing I would change is that I was promoted up too high and really struggled with the quality of work life. I got too far away from the front lines, but my position also gave me freedom from the cold case side that I wouldn’t have had as line staff.

LYNN: If you had to pinpoint one specific skill or talent an investigator needs to be successful, what would that be?

This isn’t necessarily a skill or talent, but I believe the best investigators have empathy for the victims. That emotional connection drives a person to be better, learn new skills to help the case, and keeps them engaged on the case regardless of the circumstances. In many ways the Golden State Killer case was solved because those of us involved persisted out of an obligation to the victims.

LYNN: If you could write a one sentence epitaph regarding your career, what would it be?

I made a difference.

LYNN: I have no doubt you've made a difference, Paul. And I appreciate the time you've given me, as well as your candor. Thanks so very much.