Jane Mixer: The Controversial Conviction
The Promising Law Student
Jane Louise Mixer was born on February 23, 1946, in Michigan to parents Marian and Dan Mixer. Her father was a prominent dentist in the area, and Jane grew up alongside two siblings named Dan and Barbara.
Jane was the kind of student every teacher dreams of having. When she graduated from high school in 1964, she was in the top 10% of her class and an honor student. She was on the debate team, a cheerleader, and so well-liked that she was one of only two students selected to deliver a commencement address. She was voted "best all around girl" in her senior class.
After high school, Jane headed to the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science and Arts, where she studied economics and continued to excel. She graduated in 1968 and enrolled in law school that fall.
Keep in mind, this was 1968, and Jane was one of the only female students in the entire law program. She lived alone in the law quadrangle dormitory, and life was looking up for her. Jane was dating a guy named Phil, and shortly before the events we're discussing, Phil proposed and Jane said yes.
The Murder
In 1969, Jane was trying to catch a ride home to tell her parents the exciting news about her engagement.
But Jane never made it home.
She was found shot and strangled in a cemetery, her belongings eerily arranged beside her. The murder was brutal and mysterious, and despite extensive investigations, no one was arrested.
The Cold Case
For over three decades, Jane's case sat frozen in time. Many people believed that John Norman Collins, a serial killer who had been convicted of murdering another University of Michigan student named Karen Beineman, was also responsible for Jane's death. The murders stopped after Collins was locked up, and Jane's family wanted to believe that her killer was behind bars.
All of the evidence from Jane's case—including bullet fragments, a phone book, Polaroids, a nylon stocking, and blood scrapings—was sealed up and put into long-term storage.
The DNA Breakthrough
But in 2001, everything changed when DNA testing was performed on the evidence.
The DNA pointed to a man named Gary Leiterman, a 62-year-old former nurse who had no prior connection to Jane. Gary was arrested and charged with her murder.
In 2005, Gary Leiterman went on trial. The prosecution's theory was that Gary had called Jane using the name "David Johnson," picked her up, made a sexual advance, and then killed her. The case against Gary rested on three main pieces of evidence: DNA found on Jane's pantyhose, handwriting analysis suggesting Gary wrote the name "David Johnson" in Jane's address book, and the fact that Gary owned a .22 caliber gun (the same type used to kill Jane).
Gary was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
The Controversy
But the conviction was highly controversial.
Three scientists later performed a statistical analysis and concluded that the DNA evidence was likely the result of lab contamination. They noted that the DNA on the pantyhose came exclusively from Gary Leiterman with no detectable DNA from Jane herself—which was highly unusual. The scientists argued it was more likely that contamination happened in the lab than that Gary was guilty.
Gary Leiterman died in prison on July 4, 2019, at the age of 76. He maintained his innocence until the very end.
Jane Mixer's murder case remains a case where the official answer doesn't seem solved. Was Gary Leiterman truly guilty? Or was Jane's real killer never caught?
TRANSCRIPT:
Jane Mixer MELISSA
Melissa: [00:00:00] In 19
69,
20 3-year-old law student, Jane Mixer thought she was catching a simple ride
home to tell her parents she was engaged. Instead, she became
one of Michigan's most haunting murder
mysteries. She was found, shot and strangled in a cemetery. her belongings eely arranged beside her for decades. Her case sat frozen in time until DNA testing promised
answers. Instead, it delivered
chaos because when the evidence pointed to a 4-year-old boy,
things got weird
and fast.
Marker
Mandy: Hey guys, and welcome to the Moms and Mysteries podcast, a True Crime podcast featuring myself, Mandy, and my dear friend Melissa. Hi, Melissa.
Melissa: Mandy, how are you?
Mandy: I am doing well, enjoying the beautiful, crisp autumn weather we are having lately, and you know, weather talk makes both of us happy, but I think it makes us even happier when we're talking about how much we love the weather.
Melissa: Yeah, it's so gorgeous. 10 outta 10. Those listening [00:01:00] overseas that always wanna know what our weather is. It's imagine your perfect day, and that's what we're having right now. It's gorgeous.
Mandy: Absolutely. Absolutely.
So we'll get right into the story for this week. Jane Louise Mixer was born on February 23rd, 1946 in Michigan to parents, Marian and Dan.
Her dad was a pretty prominent dentist in the area, and Jane grew up alongside two siblings named Dan and Barbara. She was the kind of student that every teacher really dreams of having. When she graduated from high school in 1964, she was right
up there in the top 10% of her class and an honor student. This girl was busy. She was on the debate team. She was a cheerleader and she was so well-liked that she was one of only two students selected to deliver a commencement address And for the ultimate stamp of approval, she was voted best all around girl in her senior class, which I feel [00:02:00] like that has to feel amazing
Melissa: Yeah.
and I can remember
people, you know, I went to school with who got something at least similar to that and you understand the
kind of person that gets that they're just friends with everyone,
kind, smart, best all around. I mean, that's what it is. and uh, yeah, so that is
such a high
praise.
Mandy: For sure. So after high school, Jane headed to the University of Michigan's College of Literature, science and Arts, where she studied economics and she continued to really excel. Her teachers called her a dream student. She was in the prestigious academic honor society. She was also in Phi Beta Kappa, and she was a social activist who just genuinely wanted to help people.
She graduated in 1968 and enrolled in, um, law school that fall. Now, keep in mind, this was 1968 and Jane was one of the only female students in the entire law program, and she lived alone in the law. quadrangle dormitory, but [00:03:00] life was looking up for her.
Jane was dating a guy named Phil, and shortly before the events we're talking about today, the two of them got engaged. Things were finally starting to fall in place for this brilliant and determined young woman. Jane was so excited about her engagement that she decided she just had to go back home and tell her parents.
So on the weekend of March 20th, 1969, she decided to make this trip. So, like we said before, Jane was kind of shy and she had never really done anything like this before, but for this particular trip, she went to the student union building and used this ride board that they had there. This was actually a common thing back then, but it was something that, it was kind of like Uber and Lyft of the sixties, you know?
But it was on a board, you know? You would go and look and I guess look for someone to give you a ride, you know? Or people that were offering. Giving rides
for money. So kind of like a taxi service, but you know, I guess you pick one, it's a stranger, same, same concept as Uber and Lyft.
Melissa: but you can't see their [00:04:00]
Mandy: but You
can't see their stars.
Right, exactly. So Jane scheduled a ride with a stranger who told her that his name was David Johnson and she told her parents that she and David would be leaving Ann Arbor around 6:30 PM on Thursday, March 20th, and that she expected to be home around 10:00 PM.
Melissa: Jane's fiance Phil went by her apartment around 6:00 PM to say goodbye, and she confirmed that she was expecting David Johnson to pick her up at six 30, but six 30 came and went at seven o'clock.
Phil called Jane. She picked up and said, no, she hadn't left yet, that David was running late. Phil called again at 8:00 PM but there was no answer. He assumed that David had finally picked her up and they were just headed out. Unfortunately, Phil's assumption was wrong. Around 3:00 AM It was now Friday, March 21st. Jane's father, Dan, called Phil the dreadful news that Jane had not arrived home. So Phil goes straight [00:05:00] to Jane's dorm room in Ann Arbor to search for clues and her parents officially reported her missing to the Muskegon police. Just a few hours later at around 7:00 AM that same morning, a woman named Nancy frantically called the police after she made a shocking discovery. She had found Jane's body in the Denton Cemetery, which is about 15 miles east of Ann Arbor. The cemetery was located off a relatively deserted gravel road.
It was called Crossroad. The community of Denton itself was unincorporated and really small. It only had about 300 people living in it at the time. Nancy told the police that her son had gone off to walk to school, only to come right back with a JL Hudson Company shopping bag that he said he found in the gravel road. So the boy handed this bag to his mom, and when Nancy looks inside, she finds a card addressed to mom as well as a gift wrapped package and a student's notes. [00:06:00] But as Nancy examined the package closer, she noticed something horrifying. It was all bloody. So she got in her car Intending to go get her son. And so she pulls out of her driveway and she happened to look across the street, into the cemetery, and that's when she saw the body. Nancy said she literally started screaming when she saw that. Imagine your kid walks home with some kind of package. You're like, oh, weird.
You found this. You look at it, see it's bloody, and think what has happened. You leave and now you see a body across the street from you. Oh, terrifying. When investigators arrived at the Denton Cemetery, they found a meticulously staged scene. Jane was lying on her back with her head leaning up against a headstone, just a foot inside the wire fence of the cemetery. The upper half of her body was covered with a yellow raincoat and a quote unquote cemetery blanket covered the lower half. Her jumper was shoved up
near her head [00:07:00] and her pantyhose was pulled
down around her neck was a nylon stocking that was not
hers, and it was twisted
tightly. And here's a really weird detail.
Her shoes
were neatly placed next to her body, along with a suitcase and a copy of the novel
Catch 22. The autopsy revealed the horrifying cause of death. 23-year-old Jane Mixer had been shot twice in the head with a 22 caliber gun and then strangled With that nylon stalking.
A crucial detail though was that there had been no sign of sexual assault and she had not been beaten.
Mandy: With Phil cleared as a suspect, the main mission became finding this
man, David Johnson, that Jane had scheduled a ride with.
They questioned male students at the university, but yet they
never could find the person. the one potential lead they did find about that name was that at around
10:00 PM on the night Jane was murdered, a woman who identified herself as
Janie [00:08:00] Mixer had called a student named David Johnson. This David Johnson didn't answer the phone, but his roommate did, and the woman who was on the other end asked if David still intended to drive her to Muskegon that night,
and the roommate said. No way. David is on stage performing in a campus play right now. So when police later spoke to that student, David Johnson, he swore he didn't know Jane and had never spoken to her before.
So the police were thinking, well, maybe she called, you know, maybe she was trying to get in touch with her ride. She called the wrong David Johnson, and that's why, you know how she got connected with that roommate or maybe this person who actually gave her a ride.
Was lying about his name.
Um, so there, I feel like there was a few possibilities.
They were thinking like it could have gone any kind of
Melissa: Yeah,
it's a common enough name too. And I feel like, especially at the time, that it wouldn't be too surprising if you called the wrong one.
Mandy: Right, for sure. So the detectives [00:09:00] searched the law school basement and found a phone booth with a phone book, and on the cover the words mixer and Muskegon were written. And so they thought that, it seemed like Jane
May have been trying to make a list or track down a ride and was writing things down, but.
All of that really
didn't lead anywhere,
uh, for the original investigation and with no other leads, the detective started looking into a possibility that must have been terrifying for the entire Ann Arbor community. They
thought that it was possible Jane's murder could be tied to the Michigan
murders. So Jane was actually the third
co-ed that was killed in that area in two years. Joan Shell and Mary Fletcher had been killed before her, though the two of them had been strangled and not shot. But then over the next five months in 19 69, 4 more women would be killed in the same area. One woman, Alice EM'S murder stood out because it shared the 22 caliber and strangulation elements that were present in Jane Mixer murder. [00:10:00] Not long after the final murder, a man named John Norman Collins was arrested. Authorities said Collins was a suspect in all the Michigan murders, even though he was only ever charged and convicted for the murder of one victim named Karen Byman. The murder stopped after Collins was locked up. So many people simply just accepted that he was the man who also killed Jane Mixer. Jane's sister Barbara admitted that since the murders had stopped, the family wanted to believe that Collins was their guy, and that the pain surrounding Jane's death was so bad that they just didn't really want to revisit the whole situation.
They were also willing to really accept that John Norman Collins was responsible for her murder and with him behind bars and no other leads to suggest anything different. all of the evidence that was from Jane's case, including the bullet fragments, the foam book, you know, the Polaroids, the nylon stocking, and that scraping of blood from under her hand.
all of that was sealed up and [00:11:00] put into long-term storage. And we have more to get into after a quick break to hear a word from this week's sponsors.
Marker
Melissa: And now back to the episode.
Marker
Melissa: So before the break, there's this man named John Norman Collins, who had been convicted of a murder of a
student named Karen Biman. And at this point, the family, and I guess
authorities really believe that this guy was very likely
connected to Jane's death and the
family. Agreed. And so everyone kind of thought they were moving on from there,
so the Jane Mixer case. Really, nothing happens with it for over three decades, but in 2001, everything really changes when various items of evidence that were
collected way back in 1969 were pulled from storage and sent to the state police crime lab for DNA testing and analysis.
It is interesting to me, we've come so far in DNA. With DNA that, you know, every few years they look into some of these cases and think, okay, well let's try [00:12:00] this. Now we've, we've gone so much further with evidence. Unfortunately there's only so much, you know, DNA and stuff that you can hold onto or how much you have to use.
But I'm always interested when it's like enough time has gone by and they're able to say, okay, let's, let's see what we can find now. it's not like a perfect system, but I'm glad that there's something but this is where the story gets really messy, so just make sure you're paying attention. In 2002, Jane's DNA was being handled in the lab and on that same day, DNA samples from two other men, John David Ru Ellis and Gary Leman were also being handled. By a different scientist. So now we fast forward to December 17th, 2003. The single spot of dried blood that was found on Jane's left hand matched John David
Ellis. Here's the problem though, John David Ellis was four years old at the time of Jane's murder in 1969. On top of that, he lived over 60 miles away in the [00:13:00] Cas area in Detroit. So this is really the first red flag, I would say
being four years old is the
biggest red flag on this one.
Mandy: for sure.
Melissa: So then eight months later on August 26th, 2004, they get a second. Even more compelling match stains that were found on Jane's pantyhose matched a man named Gary Lieman. Gary Lieman had been 26 years old at the time of the murder, and he had never been a suspect in the original investigation. So lab testing on three cuttings from the pantyhose revealed Letterman's, DNA. So all three of these people, their DNA, is all at the same place at the same time.
And now we found that all three of them are connected. So that's not weird that these were random things at the same time, um, you know, all come together. So according to trial testimony, the DNA though was not consistent with blood or semen, but rather with saliva, sweat, or skin cells. What's so incredibly unusual and really is another massive red [00:14:00] flag, is that Letterman's, DNA was found exclusively on the pantyhose, but the problem was there was no detectable DNA from Jane mixer herself, even though. They were on her when she died. So how do we have this random guy's, DNA on this, but not even the person who had it on them was there. So like things are not going well in this. So investigators also claim they found partial matches to Gary's DNA on the bloody towel that was under Jane's head and the nylon stocking twisted around her neck. Their theory was that maybe he was sweating as he was moving her body. Here's another interesting fact. Gary Litman's, DNA was already in the system for a very specific reason. In January, 2002, he was required to submit a sample after pleading guilty to a felony count of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud. Three days before that guilty plea, a new state [00:15:00] law had taken effect requiring convicted felons to give DNA samples.
So that timing is
just really crazy. So one state investigator
told the Detroit Free Press quote, he nearly missed being discovered.
he was one of the first people required to
submit a DNA sample under the new law.
So Dr. Steven Milligan, who did the DNA testing calculated that the
probability that someone other than Gary Lieman contributing his DNA on the cuttings of that pantyhose was at its low end, one in more than 40 trillion,
Mandy: So what was
Melissa: right?
Yeah.
Mandy: So now that investigators had
a name, they spent the next two and a half months
looking
into the
life of Gary Lieman. They learned that he was born in Ann Arbor in
1942 and grew up in Wayne, Michigan.
He graduated from Wayne Memorial
High School in 1960 and in high school he was a class representative, a hall monitor, and He played
football. He then served in the Navy
as a surgical technician [00:16:00] until 1965.
In 1969, which is the year that
Jane was murdered, 26-year-old, Gary was living in Westland, which
is just eight miles from the Denton Cemetery. At the time, he was
working at a 3M plant. A friend from that time period said that Gary was an avid hunter.
He owned Iris setters, he had shotguns, and he also had a 22 caliber Magnum revolver. Remember, Jane was killed with a 22 caliber gun. After the murder, Gary eventually moved to Pawpaw. He got married in 1977 to a woman named so, and they adopted a son and a daughter. He then went back to school in the early eighties and earned two nursing degrees and worked as a nurse at a medical center in Kalamazoo for over 20 years.
Melissa: Kalamazoo is maybe my favorite town name.
I Love
it. so much.
Mandy: and Gary was even elected to the school board. By all accounts, Gary was a respected member of the community, [00:17:00] but that respectability crumbled. In 1999 when Gary became addicted
to prescription pain medication after a painful bout of kidney stones,
he began stealing blank
prescription forms from work and forging prescriptions.
This all culminated on October 3rd, 2001 when he was arrested for
shoplifting a forged prescription.
Police searched his car and found dozens of blank forms. He was charged with three felonies, but ultimately pleaded guilty to one felony count of fraudulently obtaining drugs in January of 2002. He was ordered to attend a drug treatment program and if he completed it, the case would be dismissed.
It was that guilty plea that triggered the new law requiring him to submit the saliva swab in February of 2002, and that same swab would be matched to Jane Mixer pantyhose years later. Gary later completed the program and his conviction was dismissed in March of [00:18:00] 2003, but by then the swab was already in the system, just waiting for that cold case evidence to finally catch up.
And we have more to get into after one last break to hear a word from this week's sponsors.
Marker
Melissa: And now back to the episode.
Marker
Melissa: So to recap, we have DNA on Jane's hand from a 4-year-old boy, John David Rues, and we also have DNA on her pantyhose from Gary Lieman, a man who was 26 at the time of the murder. But again, we also have none of her DNA on the pantyhose that was there.
So. Lots of weird stuff going on, but despite the two matches, investigators couldn't find any connection between Jane Gary, or John David. They actually couldn't even connect Jane with anyone in John David's family. So only Gary is arrested and charged with Jane's murder in November of 2004. When investigators finally speak to him, Gary stuck to his story. He said he didn't know Jane and had nothing to do with his [00:19:00] murder, but of course they don't believe him because of the DNA. The arrest really shocked everyone who knew him. Gary's wife and children stood by him while Jane's family who had wanted to believe that John Norman Collins was the killer for so long, said they didn't know Gary either. Jane's 90-year-old father was clear. He said, quote, we are only after justice if the person is guilty. And quote. But during a search of Gary's home, detectives found a revolver cylinder
that was determined to be consistent with the construction and design of a
Ruger single 6 22
revolver cylinder.
It was later confirmed that Gary had purchased and registered a six shot, 22 caliber Ruger revolver in 1967, which was just two years before the murder. Later in 1987, he had reported it stolen, and this next part is really dark During the search, detectives found pictures of a partially naked
teenage exchange student. [00:20:00] The girl's eyes were closed. She was lying on Gary's bed and her clothes were pulled up. Investigators also found powdered Valium and Benadryl in Gary's shave kit, which they felt could have been used to Induce deep sleep. These pictures led to a separate charge of creating child pornography. Gary denied taking or owning the pictures, but eventually pleaded guilty to felony possession of child sexually abusive materials. That is one that you would not want to plead guilty to. So I don't understand that if you were definitely not guilty. But then Gary's former roommate from the late sixties or early seventies, this guy named Paul, He came forward with some seriously damning information. Paul claimed that when he lived with Gary, he kept a stack of newspapers about the Michigan murders in his bedroom closet. Paul also said that Gary bragged about having drugs that could kill a woman and get [00:21:00] this. Paul claimed that Gary made him actually fire a
22
caliber pistol at a shooting range in their basement. And when I read that the first time, I was like, what is happening? How do you have a. Uh, shooting range in the basement, but I have actually heard of that.
Like, that's a very weird thing, but it, it's happened. Um, but Paul said after he fired the
gun
once, Gary really just kind of lost interest. And so Paul speculated that basically The only reason that Gary would've wanted him to shoot
this gun was that Paul's fingerprints are now.
On this gun. However, it needs to be noted that other people who lived or worked with Gary at the
time did not remember him having a firing
range in his basement, which I personally feel like it's one of those things you would remember.
Yeah. Number one, I'd remember
you had a basement because that's what weird in Florida. and number two, if you had, if you had a shooting range, yeah, I would remember.
But Gary denied
asking Paul to fire a gun or owning those newspaper clippings.
Mandy: [00:22:00] 62-year-old Gary Lieberman's trial for Jane's murder began on July 11th, 2005. The prosecution's theory was simple. They said Gary called Jane, using the name David Johnson. Jane got into his car and at some point he made a sexual advance that led to murder. The prosecution argued that Gary had
an interest in victimizing helpless women, and they used the all new non DNA evidence to support the DNA found on the pantyhose.
That evidence included the child pornography case, his unusual interest in the Michigan murders, and the fact that he had owned a 22 caliber gun. Gary's former roommate, Paul testified for the prosecution and his testimony was considered damning. A handwriting expert named Thomas Riley also testified he compared those words, mixer and Muskegon from the 1969 phone book to known samples of Gary's handwriting, and concluded that it was highly probable that Gary is the one [00:23:00] who wrote those words on the phone book cover.
But the defense missed some crucial points. The original phone book had actually been thrown out by a custodian, so Riley's testimony was based only on a picture. He even testified about pen pressure, which he shouldn't have done using just a photo because he couldn't actually examine the phone book itself.
He did concede that the lack of the original document hampered his ability to expressly identify the writing as Gary's. And a key part of his testimony was that the misspelling of Muskegon was, I guess, a significant finding,
Melissa: Well, it's like the
Beverly Hills versus Beverly Hills.
Spelled with an LEY in the Jinx, like that was such a big deal 'cause he consistently spelled it wrong. So this guy putting an extra E in the word that doesn't belong there, obviously, if he's doing that again, that makes
sense.
Mandy: but the defense failed to point out that Gary had been asked to recreate the words in the phone book for comparison. So of
course, you know, he [00:24:00] misspelled it. The jury was then left with the improper impression that Gary had spelled the word incorrectly on his own accord.
A state police ballistics
expert also testified that the bullet fragments from Jane's brain were similar to
fragments that were found in
Gary's home. They testified that the home fragments could have been fired from a 22 caliber six shot Ruger
revolver, but. Honestly, over three dozen models of guns can fire similar bullets, and 22 caliber is one of the most commonly used and commonly sold.
So it's kind of hard to really pin that down. The defense correctly pointed out that fragments recovered from Jane's head were too badly damaged to actually even provide any conclusive data.
Melissa: So the core of the defense was simple. The DNA was compromised. They focused on the
mind-boggling fact that John David Ru's, DNA was on Jane's hand again. He was four years old at the time. though, the prosecution's really [00:25:00] absurd theory was that Jane, Gary, and this 4-year-old who again lived 60
miles away and was four, were all together between midnight and 3:00 AM. they said Gary was the murderer, and 4-year-old John David was just this bleeding bystander. The fact that DNA from all three of them was processed in the same lab 33 years later, well. That was just a coincidence according to the prosecution. Come on now. Come on. You have to think.
It's more than that. The lab technicians emphatically, though, testified that cross-contamination was impossible because
every precaution had been taken Last year or two years ago, maybe now, uh, Mandy and I
went to AUM
and we learned about their,
process that they go through for contamination and stuff to make sure that nothing is contaminated as they're looking through DNA.
And it was. Incredible. But I also think they're like the most
strict maybe in the country, um, by the way that they do things. But this
[00:26:00] technician at this other place is saying it's impossible because they do everything right. And as long as there's human error, I just don't think that's, you can say that about anything
Mandy: For sure.
Melissa: but forensic scientist, Sarah Alt, who handled the John David Ruel as evidence did admit that his DNA
somehow ended up. On the spot of blood from Jane's hand, she said we were able to identify the point at which the overlap occurred as to how or why we were not able to figure that out.
The defense's expert, Dr. Daniel Crane testified that cross-contamination was the only reasonable conclusion for John David's DNA on Jane's hand, given that he was only four years old at the time and lived so far away. And by the way, John David was very lucky, in my opinion, that he was only four years old at the time because he would've been drug into this Dr. Crane also testified about the pantyhose. He found it [00:27:00] unusual and rather unexpected that Gary's DNA was on the pantyhose, but no reportable amount of DNA from Jane was found. Right there, throw it out. That doesn't make any sense. Dr. Crane also pointed out that DNA can be easily transferred between objects or from a person to an object. the defense hammered the point. The mere presence of DNA says nothing about the time or circumstances under which it got there. Dr. Crane successfully impressed upon the jury that the testing should not be trusted because the potential for cross-contamination was simply too great, especially
given the impossible John David Ruis match. So despite all this doubt. On July 22nd, 2005, the jury found Gary guilty of murdering Jane after deliberating for
only four hours. Gary's
attorney was completely shocked. He said the jury disregarded so much evidence and hung the
decision on one piece of evidence. If there wasn't reasonable [00:28:00] doubt in this case, then for the 20 years I've been a lawyer, I've been living in a dream world. Gary Lieman was sentenced to life without parole on August 30th.
Mandy: Following his conviction, Gary motioned for a new
trial, arguing that the DNA evidence was so unreliable that it should never have been allowed to ever be presented
to the
jury. He presented a
report from a new expert named
Dr. Theodore Kees, who concluded that the only reasonable
explanation for Ruis DNA on Jane's hand was
cross-contamination. This doctor also noted that Gary's DNA was found in amounts that were in vast excess to that contributed by Jane on the
pantyhose, meaning basically there was none of her own DNA and like it was only
his. So yeah.
And this doctor also said that Jane's DNA had been, you know, deposited in the, in the system back in 1969 when
it was collected. And at that time it,
a lot of time had passed. And so her DNA was degraded while Gary's had been collected at a more [00:29:00] recent
point in time. So I guess he's saying
that like the difference there,
you know, his DNA, there's gonna be a lot more of a strong chance for getting a good match than you will with Jane's because
her DNA was So much older. So Gary was arguing that since the, you know, evidence of contamination was so obvious that none of the testing results should be deemed reliable and therefore should have been inadmissible in his trial. The trial court, however, denied the motion. The court and the court of appeals agreed that while this Dr.
Kess had offered additional observations, they really weren't so different from what the jury already heard From the defense's first expert, Dr. Crane. The Court of Appeals did however, point out that the DNA wasn't the only evidence that supported his guilt. They mentioned the phone book handwriting, which again, was also highly questionable because it was, you know, examined from a photo and not the actual document.
And they also brought up the fact that Gary owned a 22 caliber handgun during the time period that Jane Mixer was [00:30:00] murdered. But many people still continued to question Gary's guilt. In 20 18, 3 professors published a statistical analysis of this case. They noted that serious reservations about the DNA evidence in this case have long been expressed, and they compared two competing hypothesis.
they said the prosecution's hypothesis, which was guilty, where Gary's DNA was deposited on Jane's clothing at the crime scene in 1969. Versus the defense's hypothesis, which is that he is innocent. And that is where Gary's DNA was deposited on Jane's clothing in the DNA lab in 2002. And so the professors pointed out that the lab's initial impossible claim that contamination was impossible.
So these professors pointed out the lab's, you know, initial claim that would've been impossible, um, that contamination was not possible. And they were referencing a report that stated laboratory errors happen even in the best laboratories. So basically they're saying like.
[00:31:00] Of course the lab's gonna say it's impossible that there could have been contamination. But obviously, like you were saying before, we all know that human error exists even in the most, you know, even under the best circumstances. And even when people try very hard, the human still make mistakes.
There's still things that can happen.
Melissa: Right. one study they cited, even concluded that contamination rates must always be greater than zero, so you can't go
around
saying 0% chance because there's always some chance. They also addressed the incredibly strange finding that the DNA on the pantyhose came exclusively from
Gary Lieman with no
detectable DNA from Jane herself.
The professors ultimately concluded after performing their statistical analysis that it was way more likely that contamination happened in the lab, or that John Norman Collins killed Jane than it was for Gary Leaderman to be guilty. So the conviction stands on three wobbly legs, highly questionable handwriting evidence, the mere ownership Of a common caliber of [00:32:00] gun DNA evidence that three scientists
later argued was likely the result of an error
in the very lab responsible for solving the crime. As far as the public record is concerned, Gary Lieman died in prison on July 4th, 2019, at the age of 76. He maintained his innocence until the very end, and so Jane Mixer murder case really remains this.
Case where the official
answer really doesn't seem solved. and so you have to wonder from all of
that, if justice was truly served, you have somebody who could have very well went to prison for something he didn't do, although the other stuff he did, he should have been in
prison for. So I'm
not. Crying about that. Um, but also for the family
to that like huge pendulum of, we found
the guy, John Norman Collins. And now it's like, whoops, we messed up.
It's now this other guy, but also, whoops, the lab messed
up. That's, that's so much
for a family to go through.
And how do you ever [00:33:00] feel like
Mandy: Yeah.
Melissa: what
happened? You won't.
Mandy: I do feel
like I believe that they got the right person because they found, they tested multiple samples of the pantyhose and found his DNA on all of it. Um, I do have questions about why her DNA wasn't found on her own pantyhose that she was wearing. and I guess I don't really have a great explanation for why that would
be the case, but clearly we, they know that she was wearing them, right?
Melissa: Right.
Mandy: it was on her body when they found
her. But I don't know. And that does make me question, like in a situation where it would be cross-contamination or considered cross-contamination,
like how much of this, it's not like even if you do a, I don't know, they took multiple samples from the pantyhose and his DNA was on all of them.
So I'm like. Even if it was a cross, like how does, how would cross contamination happen where it would get that much of his DNA all over that much of the pantyhose and not just like, oh, we found a little speck of it on a tiny spot, but like, there was nothing anywhere else. But for them to say they found [00:34:00] it in three different samples on the pantyhose like that they were able to identify his DNA to me that,
says a lot.
Melissa: Right, but the idea that they did all this DNA testing on the same day and these three separate people, and then they connected, two of them
is,
Mandy: It is. Yeah, this is definitely one of those cases where, I feel like if, you know, I, and I know the family said that they just want closure. They're want to accept that the police have done, you know, a thorough job and that they've got the right
person and they would like to move on and
accept that as closure. But, I do feel like for me personally, it would be, you would always have that in the back of your mind. do I feel actually like it was solved? And yeah, in this case, I don't know.
You would feel that way, but I can
see why the family is willing
to
accept, you know, the answers they've been
given.
Melissa: Yeah.
absolutely.
Mandy: Alright guys, thank you so much for listening to this episode. If you have never subscribed to our show on the platform that you're listening on, please go ahead and hit that subscribe button so that you don't miss our future episodes.
And if you've never reviewed our show, [00:35:00] please give us a review. Uh, we,
I read the reviews every now and then, and I share the nice ones with Melissa. So, and it does
help our show.
I do, I do, I do, We don't get too many negative ones, thankfully. Uh, but yeah, it really helps our show, uh, grow and be seen and gets the word out there about us.
So if you could like us, like subscribe and review, that
would be, uh, so appreciated. Yes. Thank you guys so much. And we'll be back next week. Same time, same place. News story.
Melissa: Have a great week.
Mandy: Bye.
