Cyberstalking to Contract Killing Pt. 2 with Annie Elise

In this episode of Serial Killers and Murderous Minds, true crime creator Annie Elise returns to frame the conclusion of the Brenda Delgado case, examining the aftermath of Kendra Hatcher’s murder and the unraveling of the plot behind it. Vanessa Richardson and Dr. Tristin Engels follow investigators as they close in on Brenda, tracing her attempts to control the narrative, manipulate witnesses, and ultimately flee the country. As the case unfolds, the cracks in her story deepen, revealing how obsession and entitlement shaped every decision she made. Later, Annie sits down with Dr. Tristin Engels for an in-depth psychological discussion, exploring the fallout of unchecked fixation, the need for control, and how these traits ultimately sealed Brenda’s fate—ending in a conviction that brought long-delayed justice. If you’re new here, don’t forget to follow Serial Killers & Murderous Minds to never miss a case! For ad-free listening and early access to episodes, subscribe to Crime House+ on Apple Podcasts. Serial Killers & Murderous Minds is a Crime House Original Podcast, powered by PAVE Studios 🎧 Need More to Binge? Listen to other Crime House Originals Clues, Crimes Of…, Murder True Crime Stories, Crime House 24/7, and more wherever you get your podcasts! Follow me on Social Instagram: @Crimehouse https://www.instagram.com/crimehouse/ TikTok: @Crimehouse https://www.tiktok.com/@crimehouse Facebook: @crimehousestudios https://www.facebook.com/crimehousestudios YouTube: @crimehousestudios https://www.youtube.com/@crimehousestudios

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Vanessa Richardson?

  Hi, everyone. Before today's episode, there's another show I want to tell you about. It's called What the Fact with Connor Tomlinson from Netflix's Love on the Spectrum and Carter Roy. Every week, they take three unbelievable true facts from history and tell you the full story behind them. Plus, Connor's infectious energy that'll make you realize history is the most fascinating thing on earth. Follow What the Fact wherever you listen, or subscribe on YouTube at What the Fact Pod.

• 0:36Speaker 01

  This is Crime House.

• 0:42Speaker 02

  Failure is a normal part of life. Whether we don't get a promotion we were gunning for, or we don't reach our fitness goals, or we botch a new baking recipe, it happens. Most of us can adapt and adjust when things don't go our way. But some people take failure a lot harder. It doesn't just wound their ego, but their entire sense of self. That's how Brenda Delgado felt when she faced one of the biggest failures she'd ever known. In 2015, Brenda had tried everything to convince her ex-boyfriend Ricky that they should be together. But Ricky only had eyes for his new girlfriend, Dr. Kendra Hatcher. Brenda knew she couldn't compete with Kendra, but she couldn't cope with the rejection. She

• 1:26Speaker 02

  decided she had to get Ricky back, which meant that she had to get Kendra out of the picture for good.

• 1:47Vanessa Richardson?

  The human mind is powerful. It shapes how we think, feel, love, and hate. But sometimes it drives people to commit the unthinkable. This is Serial Killers and Murderous Minds, a Crime House original. I'm Vanessa Richardson, and once again, Dr. Engels and I are thrilled to have Annie Elise join us as we conclude our deep dive into Brenda Delgado. Welcome, Annie.

• 2:10Speaker 02

  Glad to be back for one more.

• 2:12Tristin Engels?

  You're more than welcome to join us anytime, Annie. I said it last time, and I will say it again. For anyone who has not subscribed to Annie's YouTube or her podcasts, they are a must-follow for us.

• 2:24Vanessa Richardson?

  And just like last episode, Annie will introduce the episode for us, then stick around for an extended conversation with her and Dr. Engels.

• 2:33Speaker 02

  It has been so fun doing this with you guys, so let's get into it. Today, we're concluding our deep dive on Brenda Delgado. Last time, we talked about Brenda's upbringing and the events that put her on the path to murder. Today, we'll finish up with the fallout from Brenda's horrific actions and where things stand today. And I am really excited for this episode because the way Brenda handles herself after Ricky's murder, it tells you so much about her. So I'm especially fascinated to hear what Dr. Engels has to say. She'll be talking about things like the tactics some criminals use to bend the narrative, how investigators sometimes overlook major clues,

• 3:13Speaker 02

  and how grief can influence a suspect's moral compass and push them to do the right thing. And as always, we will be asking the question, what makes a killer?

• 3:27Vanessa Richardson?

  Before we get started, be advised this episode contains descriptions of gun violence and murder, so please listen with care.

• 3:37Vanessa Richardson?

  By the summer of 2015, 33-year-old Brenda Delgado had become obsessed with her ex-boyfriend's new lover. Dr. Ricky Paniagua and Dr. Kendra Hatcher had only been together a few months, and they were ready to spend the rest of their lives together. Brenda couldn't stand by and watch the life she'd envisioned with Ricky be taken from her, so she enlisted the help of 23-year-old Crystal Cortez and 31-year-old Christopher Love in her plot to kill Kendra.

• 4:09Vanessa Richardson?

  Brenda offered Crystal $500 to help her and offered Christopher a combination of drugs and cash, and on September 2nd, 2015, they carried out their plot. While Brenda was elsewhere, forming an alibi, Crystal was behind the wheel of a black Jeep Cherokee that they'd borrowed from Brenda's friend, Jose Ortiz. Christopher rode in the backseat, carrying a 40 caliber Smith & Wesson. They followed Kendra back to her apartment building, known as Park Gables 17, when she got off work. After she parked her car and started making her way inside, Christopher snuck up behind her, shot her once in the head, and killed her. Christopher stole Kendra's coach purse and left her car door open.

• 4:54Vanessa Richardson?

  Then he and Crystal fled the scene. Christopher hid in the backseat of the Jeep while Crystal sped out of the garage. She drove to Jose's house, where Brenda paid them the money they were owed, and kept Kendra's purse for herself.

• 5:09Tristin Engels?

  Keeping her purse is a very interesting twist. There are a few reasons that she might have done that. I mean, we can start with a practical one. She might have thought that this would disrupt the investigation, maybe even make it appear as if it was a robbery. This fits with her logistical problem-solving patterns, and it was certainly thinking ahead if that was the case, but it could also be symbolic. She was deeply jealous of Kendra, and the fact that Kendra represented everything she felt that she lacked in herself. And in some cases, taking a personal belonging in a dynamic like this can serve as asserting control, or even erasing the competition, so to speak, almost like claiming a victory, which could very well fit here as well, given the context and what led up to this moment.

• 5:52Tristin Engels?

  It could also be overconfidence, but I don't think it was one singular reason. More than likely, it was a combination of these reasons.

• 5:59Vanessa Richardson?

  What does it suggest about a killer when they're comfortable keeping items from their victim? Is Brenda showing signs of being desensitized to what she's just had done?

• 6:09Tristin Engels?

  I don't think it's necessarily suggesting that she's desensitized because it's her first violent act that we know of. I think a more accurate term here is I think it's emotional compartmentalization. If someone can separate the object from the person that it belonged to, and they can disconnect from the violence that occurred, that reflects a psychological ability to separate their experience into isolated parts.

• 6:35Tristin Engels?

  That kind of compartmentalization allows them to function after having orchestrated something this serious. And the emotional reality of the harm gets walled off, so it doesn't fully register in the moment. It's not that she's unaware of what happened, it's that she separated herself from the human impact of what she did.

• 6:56Vanessa Richardson?

  It's not clear what Brenda did with the purse once she got it, or what was inside of it, but clearly, she felt no remorse. It's also possible her goal was to make the murder seem like a robbery gone wrong, and to destroy the evidence. When officers first responded to the incident at Park Gables 17, they did think Kendra's death was the result of a robbery that had turned violent, since they didn't find any personal belongings near her. All they found was a single bullet casing on the floor of her car, but that clue wouldn't help them unless they found a gun to match it. However, these setbacks didn't mean Brenda had gotten away with it just yet, because there was still more evidence for investigators to comb through.

• 7:40Vanessa Richardson?

  After identifying Kendra's body, officers collected security footage from inside the parking garage, and it turned out there were a ton of cameras. Somehow, after all the time Brenda and Crystal spent trailing Kendra, they never realized this. Police quickly compiled footage of a black Jeep Cherokee pulling into the garage and speeding away minutes later. It was blurry, but they could tell a woman was behind the wheel. And while there was no video of the shooting itself, officers soon found something that made them think Kendra's death hadn't been random after all. They stumbled upon a piece of footage that showed the Jeep parking a few spaces away from Kendra, moments after she parked her car.

• 8:24Vanessa Richardson?

  A man in a black hoodie got out of the back of the Jeep and walked out of frame. Seconds later, the Jeep reversed and the man quickly re-entered the backseat, then the Jeep drove off.

• 8:37Vanessa Richardson?

  To the investigators, the fact that there were two people in the Jeep moving so fast and deliberately suggested that Kendra's murder was planned. But that begged the question of who would target her and why. To help find the suspects, the authorities released the footage to the public, hoping someone would recognize the Jeep and come forward. Shortly after, another new development fell onto their laps. When Ricky showed up at the scene, he had plans to go to Kendra's apartment that night since they were supposed to leave for Cancun the next day. Instead, he was met with tragedy. The woman he hoped to spend the rest of his life with was gone. In the midst of his grief, Ricky immediately identified himself to the police.

• 9:21Vanessa Richardson?

  He went to the station to speak with the lead investigator, Detective Eric Barnes. Ricky told Barnes about his and Kendra's travel plans. He said he was completely shocked and couldn't imagine who would have done this to Kendra, who was known for her kindness and generosity. But that didn't mean no one was after her. Detective Barnes decided to show Ricky the image of the woman from the surveillance footage in case he recognized her. And that's when Ricky said something curious. The woman in the driver's seat looked a lot like his ex-girlfriend, Brenda Delgado. Even though Brenda hadn't been the one driving, she and Crystal did resemble each other. Ricky showed Barnes a picture of Brenda and explained his history with her, including

• 10:06Vanessa Richardson?

  how Brenda used to unexpectedly show up wherever he was after they broke up. Ricky said at the time, he thought it was just coincidence, but now, he couldn't shake the feeling that something sinister had been brewing underneath the surface all along. Meanwhile, Brenda had no idea her name had come up in the investigation, but she found herself doing damage control elsewhere.

• 10:30Vanessa Richardson?

  Not much time passed before her friend Jose saw the footage of his own car in the news. He frantically called Brenda, who he'd gotten dinner with on the night of the murder. Brenda told Jose that Crystal had been the one driving the car. Then Brenda lowered her voice as she revealed something else. She said Crystal had a drug problem and wondered aloud if maybe she'd gone to the garage to pick some up and the deal had gone bad. Brenda was lying, but Jose didn't question her. However, he said he was afraid to drive his Jeep around Dallas, so Brenda told him to paint it a different color. Jose was apprehensive, and it seems like Brenda picked up on his hesitation, because

• 11:12Vanessa Richardson?

  next, she threatened to have him deported if he told anyone about their conversation. Then, she hung up.

• 11:21Tristin Engels?

  What Brenda is doing with Jose is active damage control by attempting to manage perception, which she's skilled at. She's identifying who might become a liability and shaping their version of events before they get to speak to anyone else. And she's preemptively constructing new narratives regarding Crystal in the process in order to redirect suspicion. And she does so by essentially throwing Crystal under the bus, which is really very telling. That tells us that she values people based on their usefulness, not their loyalty. Psychologically, this suggests she's still focused on control rather than remorse. Instead of confronting consequences, she's trying to manage witnesses, shape the story, and contain exposure.

• 12:03Tristin Engels?

  That kind of thinking is common when someone believes that they can still outmaneuver the situation. It reflects continued overconfidence and emotional detachment from the harm she has caused and she continues to cause.

• 12:15Vanessa Richardson?

  In terms of Brenda telling Jose to paint his car, did she actually believe that would be enough to throw police off the scent? Or does she just really not care if the wrong person, like Jose, gets in trouble?

• 12:27Tristin Engels?

  I think it's likely a mixture of both. She likely saw Jose as someone whose exposure could delay suspicion from landing on her. If he repainted his car, that would almost certainly divert law enforcement attention. And Brenda is clearly in self-preservation mode and willing to not only kill someone for her own selfish reasons, she's also willing to recruit a friend and then turn on them. So she certainly doesn't seem like she minds what happens to Jose. When someone reaches this stage, psychologically concerned for any collateral damage is very low, if it even exists at all.

• 13:01Vanessa Richardson?

  After Brenda told Jose not to tell anyone what they talked about, he seemed to realize what kind of a person he was dealing with. And he wasted no time getting in touch with Detective Barnes. He told the detective that the Jeep was his and that he lent it to Brenda Delgado the day Kendra was murdered. Not only that, but Brenda's friend, Crystal, had returned the Jeep to his house that evening. This was the second time Barnes had heard Brenda's name. He knew it wasn't a coincidence. He needed to speak with her. He got her contact information from Jose and called her in for questioning. When Brenda got to the station on September 4th, two days after the murder, the two of them stepped into an interrogation room together.

• 13:45Vanessa Richardson?

  From the moment they sat down, Brenda was calm and polite, almost too calm, which Barnes found suspicious. Brenda even tried to bond with him, pointing out a bracelet he was wearing that denoted his Christian faith. She said she was a believer too. Then she promised to be 100% honest with him. Even though Barnes was skeptical, he went along with it. He thought if they could build a rapport, maybe he could get some information out of her. So they exchanged pleasantries and made some basic small talk. Once that was out of the way, Barnes switched gears. He pulled out a photo of Kendra and placed it on the table between them.

• 14:25Vanessa Richardson?

  Brenda said she recognized Kendra from the news, but that was the only reason she knew who she was. She told Barnes she was horrified to hear what had happened. But Barnes wasn't so sure that Brenda didn't know who Kendra was. Ricky had already told him how hard Brenda had taken their breakup. Of course, she'd know about the new woman in his life. So Barnes asked Brenda where she was when Kendra's murder took place. She told him she'd gone to the library, then to dinner with a friend. Before Barnes could say anything else, Brenda offered to show him the receipt from that dinner. She grabbed her wallet and pulled the receipt out from the very top. To the detective, Brenda's alibi seemed too perfect. And when he asked her about the Jeep,

• 15:09Vanessa Richardson?

  Brenda had an explanation for that, too. She said her friend Jose had lent her the car and that she lent it to her friend Crystal Cortez, who had it the entire day. She said Crystal even drove her to the library and then to her dinner. By that point, Barnes also knew that Crystal had driven the Jeep back to Jose's house that evening. Finally, Brenda offered up Crystal's contact information.

• 15:35Tristin Engels?

  This is a classic example of impression management, and it's a very common tactic used among different types of offenders, especially in this type of context. The belief is if they appear calm, polite, and pro-social, they will be less suspicious. And Brenda not only behaved that way with her demeanor, she came prepared with receipts, quite literally. The problem is professionals like myself or those in law enforcement notice rather quickly when behavior is exaggerated or incongruent with the situation, and it tends to have the opposite effect on us. Now, I obviously wasn't in the room with her, and I've never met her. But given what we do know about her, her politeness was more likely than not a strategy meant to appear harmless and to maintain control in that moment.

• 16:20Vanessa Richardson?

  Do you think Brenda's behavior was pre-planned? Or did she go on autopilot once she was under scrutiny?

• 16:27Tristin Engels?

  In my opinion, this interaction appears pre-planned. It's possible for an innocent person, of course, to remain calm and have receipts on them from a few days prior. That certainly happens. I have some receipts in my purse right now, I'm sure. But when we look at the totality of her presentation, the level of composure, and the fact that she arrived with documentation and was ready with answers, that's a pattern. It suggests preparation rather than surprise. Most people who truly don't expect to be questioned or don't know why they're being questioned show some degree of confusion, or hesitation, or emotional variability. Brenda, however, seemed organized, controlled, and rehearsed. That pattern is more consistent with someone who anticipated scrutiny and mentally prepared how to respond to it.

• 17:12Tristin Engels?

  This doesn't prove guilt on its own, but behaviorally, it indicates she likely expected contact with law enforcement and prepared to shape the narrative from the start.

• 17:23Vanessa Richardson?

  Barnes noticed how easily Brenda had thrown Crystal under the bus, and it only raised more red flags for him. However, he didn't have enough evidence to keep Brenda at the station for much longer, so, working quickly, he had his team track down Crystal and bring her in, hoping she'd reveal something before Brenda was let go. Fortunately, they were able to bring Crystal into the station in time, and unlike Brenda, she quickly caved under the pressure. Soon, Brenda was backed into a corner, and with few options left, she made a decision that changed everything.

• 18:04Speaker 04

  Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start? Thumbtack knows homes, so you don't have to. Don't know the difference between matte paint finish and satin? Or what that clunking sound from your dryer is? With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro. You just have to hire one. You can hire top-rated pros, see price estimates, and read reviews, all on the app. Download today.

• 18:29Vanessa Richardson?

  Happy Halloween, Crime House listeners. I'm Vanessa Richardson. Did you know horror films like Abigail and Sinister were based on true stories? Join me every Sunday this month on Crime House 24/7 for Crime House of Horrors, where I dive into four stories behind some of our favorite scary movies. From Abigail, The Autopsy of Jane Doe, Sinister, and The Taking of Deborah Logan, you'll find one thing in common: the truth is scarier than fiction. Listen every Sunday on Crime House 24/7, or join Crime House Plus for all four right now, ad-free. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or at crimehouseplus.com.

• 19:17Vanessa Richardson?

  On September 4th, 2015, two days after Dr. Kendra Hatcher was killed, Brenda Delgado and Crystal Cortez sat in separate interrogation rooms inside the Dallas Police Department. Detective Eric Barnes was already suspicious of Brenda, and once Crystal started talking, Barnes started piecing together the truth of what had happened to Kendra. Crystal quickly caved under the pressure. She confessed that she was there when Kendra was murdered. However, her story kept changing. First, she said she'd been driving the Jeep when a masked man approached the car at gunpoint, got into the passenger seat, and told her to drive. Crystal said her six-year-old son was in the backseat at the time,

• 20:00Vanessa Richardson?

  and she didn't want him to get hurt, so she did what the man said. Then, she claimed the man directed her to the parking garage at Park Gable 17, where he proceeded to get out and shoot Kendra. It was a dramatic and frightening story, and Detective Barnes could tell it was completely made up. It sounded like something out of a movie, but he didn't push back. Instead, he just showed her the security footage from the garage, specifically the part where the shooter got out of the parked Jeep, and the Jeep remained parked there until he returned. Barnes asked Crystal, if she'd been taken hostage, like she claimed, then why didn't she drive away when the man got out of the car? That's when Crystal caved again.

• 20:44Vanessa Richardson?

  This time, she told a version of the story that was closer to the truth. She said her son wasn't there, and that she'd driven to the garage willingly because Brenda had offered her $500 to steal Kendra's purse.

• 20:58Tristin Engels?

  The use of partial truths in a confession is another common strategy to try and manage suspicion. It works because truth, even partial truth, often gives the illusion of credibility. If most of what is said is verifiable, at least in part, the false parts are less likely to stand out. But that's not the case with law enforcement. There are different reasons offenders do this. Some do this as a form of manipulation, but with Crystal, I think it's more likely to be a stress-driven survival response. I don't think she was trying to manipulate law enforcement. She was in a very different psychological position than Brenda was. Crystal didn't appear to be the architect of this crime, and I am by no means minimizing her role in this.

• 21:42Tristin Engels?

  She still chose to participate. But she was recruited, and now she is facing the reality of that. When people in similar positions are questioned, they often try to reduce their perceived involvement without fully lying outright. They give pieces of truth because it feels safer than a full lie, but they hold back or soften the parts that implicate them most. This happens because partial truths create psychological safety, and I'm talking about when they're not using the partial truths for manipulation. Telling something truthful reduces anxiety and guilt, but avoiding the full story protects them, not just legally, but from themselves emotionally. Unlike Brenda's pattern of strategic impression management meant for manipulation, Crystal's

• 22:25Tristin Engels?

  behavior seems to be more consistent with conflicted compliance, at least based on what we know here. She may have felt scared, ashamed, and unsure of who to trust. She also had previously admired and been loyal to Brenda, and that likely made her feel conflicted here. That emotional state leads people to test the waters and adjust based on the responses that they get from investigators, like dipping your toes in first. So in Crystal's case, I don't think it was a manipulation tactic, like I said, but rather an attempt to survive the situation by balancing honesty with self-protection.

• 23:02Vanessa Richardson?

  Even though Barnes knew Crystal was still lying, he had enough information to confront Brenda with. He went back into her interrogation room and told her what Crystal had revealed. In response, Brenda denied everything. She calmly maintained that she had no reason to harm Kendra. Barnes tried to rattle her. He told Brenda that she was a definitive link between Kendra and Crystal, and that he believed she'd sent Crystal to attack Kendra because she was envious of her. He said Ricky had chosen someone more successful, attractive, and popular, and that Brenda couldn't handle the fact that she wasn't good enough for him. Even when faced with these harsh truths, Brenda didn't crack.

• 23:45Vanessa Richardson?

  She just told Barnes he was wrong. Right when Barnes thought there was nothing more he could do, and that he'd have to let Brenda go, his colleagues told him she had outstanding traffic tickets, which they could use to keep her in custody. She was booked and placed behind bars. However, she didn't stay there long. Due to overcrowding, Brenda was released after just a few hours. By that point, Crystal had left the station as well. Despite his frustration, Barnes maintained his focus. His deputies had been working to gain access to Brenda and Crystal's phone records. Shortly after Brenda was released, they got them.

• 24:25Vanessa Richardson?

  Barnes zeroed in on a major hole in Crystal's story. If Kendra's murder really was a robbery gone wrong, that would mean at least one of the women knew who the shooter was. So as officers pored through their phone records, they looked for evidence of the gunman's identity. Pretty soon, they noticed a phone number that appeared in both women's call logs. On September 17, 2015, almost two weeks after Brenda and Crystal were last questioned, Barnes called Crystal back into the station. He probably figured it would be easier to get her to talk than Brenda, and he was right. When Barnes showed Crystal the phone number, she said, quote, "That's his number."

• 25:08Vanessa Richardson?

  Now that there was concrete evidence tying Crystal to the shooter, she was arrested and charged with capital murder, which could carry the death sentence if she was found guilty. As Crystal sat in her jail cell, racking her brain for a way to avoid being executed, police started tracking down Christopher Love. Within a couple of weeks, they found him and brought Christopher in for interrogation. Detective Barnes showed him photos of Brenda, Crystal, and Kendra. Christopher said he didn't know who any of the women were. When asked if he owned a gun, he denied that too. But by lying, Christopher had dug himself into a deeper hole because police had his vehicle in custody and were busy searching it.

• 25:53Vanessa Richardson?

  At first, they didn't find any evidence that he was linked to the crime. However, ATF agents were also at the impound lot that day for a demonstration, and an explosive-smelling dog picked up a scent in Christopher's car. He followed the scent to a small space underneath the center console where he found a 40-caliber Smith & Wesson.

• 26:18Tristin Engels?

  Obviously, law enforcement professionals are human, and human performance varies. Attention, perception, and thoroughness are affected by workload, fatigue, stress, and just overall cognitive load. No two investigators search in exactly the same way, and not everyone is familiar with all the hidden compartments or aftermarket modifications in every vehicle that they encounter. That's one reason canines are used. They detect in ways that humans simply can't. And I've seen that firsthand. When I worked in a county facility, an officer once did a demonstration for us. He hid an empty magazine, meaning no ammunition was in it, in a drawer in a large office space that I worked in. Then he went outside to get his canine from his vehicle. The canine, his name was Rodney,

• 27:02Tristin Engels?

  found it in under a minute. It would have taken a team of law enforcement investigators much longer. And just like cars, every desk was different. They had different drawers, and each drawer had different structures and components that could easily have been overlooked. It was amazing to see, truly. But beyond individual differences, there are also system-level cognitive biases that can contribute to oversights like this. And this one feels big because we're talking about missing the murder weapon, the gun, not a shell casing. So let's explore what those biases might be. One is expectation bias. If officers search a vehicle and they don't find anything significant, the brain can unconsciously shift into completion mode.

• 27:44Tristin Engels?

  Once that happens, people tend to see what they expect to see and miss what they don't. But at the same time, there has to be an endpoint. Investigators can't search indefinitely. Time and resources are limited and decisions have to be made about where effort is best spent. That's more often about resource management under pressure. And of course, there are outliers. But the challenge is that cognitive bias can influence where that line gets drawn, making a search feel complete sooner than it might truly be. Another factor is institutional trust, which is part of law enforcement culture and something I've actually observed firsthand in correctional settings. These systems rely heavily on teamwork and shared responsibility. If one team reports that they conducted a thorough search and found nothing,

• 28:27Tristin Engels?

  others often proceed under the assumption that work was done properly. That trust is operationally necessary, but it can also create a diffusion of responsibility where rechecking someone else's task feels redundant or even disrespectful. There's a very real culture amongst law enforcement that can get threatened if you question the work of another. These human and systemic factors are exactly why investigations are intentionally designed with multiple layers, perspectives, and methods. Whether those layers are followed is another entirely different conversation, though.

• 29:01Vanessa Richardson?

  Titan the Canine's discovery was a major stroke of good luck, and investigators were elated. At the station, Barnes told Christopher that they'd found the gun, and he admitted it was his. He said Brenda had promised to supply him with drugs in exchange for killing Kendra. Christopher was officially arrested, and soon firearms analysts confirmed that the pistol matched the shell casing found at the scene. However, even though this was a big step in the investigation, Christopher still wouldn't tell Barnes the full story of how Kendra's murder was planned. To figure that out, Barnes went back to the suspect he thought was most likely to talk: Crystal.

• 29:43Vanessa Richardson?

  As a mother, Crystal had the most at stake, and Barnes used that to his advantage. Crystal was offered a plea deal. If she told them everything and agreed to testify against the other suspects, she'd only be facing 35 years in prison.

• 30:00Vanessa Richardson?

  Crystal agreed. She told the authorities everything from how Brenda confided in her and how her anger turned violent. Crystal confirmed that Brenda didn't just want to scare Kendra or rob her. She wanted her dead. So Brenda preyed on Crystal's financial situation to make it happen. And once Crystal introduced her to Christopher, there was no turning back.

• 30:25Vanessa Richardson?

  Crystal also explained that Brenda made sure she wouldn't be present at the scene. Looking back, it was clear Brenda would let her and Christopher take the fall. Brenda was clearly the driving force behind the whole operation. Investigators returned to her phone records to see what other evidence they could use against her. And that's when they found Brenda's stash of screenshots she'd taken of Ricky's accounts. Investigators realized Brenda had been stalking Ricky and Kendra for months. They quickly set out to bring her back into custody. In the meantime, authorities offered Christopher a similar deal to the one Crystal got. In exchange for a reduced sentence, they wanted him to testify against Brenda.

• 31:08Vanessa Richardson?

  But Christopher refused. He said he wouldn't take the stand against anyone, even if it meant facing the death penalty.

• 31:18Tristin Engels?

  There are often multiple reasons someone like Christopher might refuse to testify even when the death penalty is on the table. One of the most powerful reasons is identity preservation. For individuals who have spent years in and out of the system, reputation carries a lot of weight. And he's already shared his reputational goals. He wants to be the top criminal. Being labeled a "snitch" can make prison life significantly more dangerous. And that can feel more immediate and threatening than a legal outcome, even one like the death penalty. Because the death penalty isn't certain, and it's only a possibility right now. And if it was certain, and he was sentenced to it, a significant number of death row inmates die of natural causes

• 32:01Tristin Engels?

  or other factors before their execution date is ever even decided. But being a snitch and living in an environment with that label comes with immediate risks, daily risks. So it's risk appraisal, too. Fear of retaliation is another factor. If Christopher believed Brenda had ties to organized crime, he might have viewed cooperating as putting himself or even people he cared about at risk, too. So whether these connections were real or exaggerated, that could have been enough to discourage him. There's also the role of optimism bias. Some defendants believe that they still have a chance to fight the charges, appeal them, or reduce their sentence later. Accepting a plea deal or testifying usually requires admitting

• 32:44Tristin Engels?

  guilt, which limits future legal options like appeals.

• 32:47Vanessa Richardson?

  It would be harder to prosecute Brenda without Christopher's testimony, but authorities still felt they had a good chance at securing her conviction. But to do that, they had to find her first.

• 33:03Vanessa Richardson?

  And when we return, Annie Elise will sit down with Dr. Engels to take a deeper look into the psychology behind escalating from cyber stalking to violence and murder.

• 33:18Speaker 01

  The moment a body is found, the clock starts ticking. Forty-eight hours. That's how long detectives have before the trail begins to go cold. From A and E and Crime House, this is the official podcast from the famous true crime series, The First Forty-Eight. Step inside the critical window, the interrogations, the dead ends, and the breakthroughs that crack a case wide open. I'm Carter Roy. Each week, I revisit a landmark homicide investigation with a depth you know and immersive, long-form storytelling built for your ears. Real detectives,

• 33:58Speaker 01

  real cases, real stakes. This is The First Forty-Eight. New episodes every Thursday. Listen to and follow The First Forty-Eight on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

• 34:19Tristin Engels?

  We're going to take a quick break from Brenda Delgado because Annie and I are going to have a conversation briefly about fixation and escalation.

• 34:27Speaker 02

  Absolutely. Well, in the Brenda Delgado case, fixation and grievance ultimately led to the murder of Dr. Kendra Hatcher. What psychological mechanisms allow someone to cross from obsession into action?

• 34:41Tristin Engels?

  I think what's frightening is that this wasn't a sudden snap. There was a progression that suggests that her mind moved from "I can't tolerate this" to "I have to change reality." Understanding that transition feels essential because it's where prevention might still be possible for Brenda.

• 34:59Speaker 02

  What are the most common first steps that you see when somebody moves from that place of fantasy into preparation?

• 35:06Tristin Engels?

  So when someone starts doing that, when they start preparing, their thoughts start turning into action. Early signs often include gathering information about the person's routines, increasing their monitoring or surveillance, and talking about harmful ideas as if they're more realistic. They might begin thinking through logistics like timing or access and even obstacles to that person. And sometimes they might start acquiring resources or even involving other people. And the key shift is from emotionally ruminating on this person and how they want to invade their life to actually practically planning it out, which really signals that there's a rising risk here and that there's escalating behaviors.

• 35:49Speaker 02

  How do emotions like shame and humiliation accelerate that transition?

• 35:55Tristin Engels?

  I think that's because shame and humiliation are threats to someone's identity. It's not just about mood. When someone feels rejected, I mean jealousy hurts. We all have felt that. Even rejection hurts. But when that rejection starts to feel humiliating, like they start to feel like they were replaced or they weren't good enough. Or people see them as a failure in some way. The pain becomes about their self-worth or their self-esteem. That kind of emotional injury is harder to tolerate and feels more urgent for them to escape. So instead of reflecting on that, like most people do, the person can start looking for a way to stop the feeling and fast.

• 36:37Tristin Engels?

  Blaming others, especially someone that they view as a rival to them, in this case Kendra, that can feel like a way to restore dignity or power. And the more you blame other people, the more you fuel unwarranted anger, and that increases the risk of acting on it.

• 36:51Speaker 02

  I'm just curious, do you see in a lot of cases where there are situations like this where they take it from fantasy to reality or into preparation where they will target their ex specifically rather than just the new person who comes into the relationship? And I ask because there's a case right now breaking out of Ohio with the Tepe murders where the ex-husband, Michael McKee, went in and not only murdered his ex-wife, but also her husband. And it seems like it's a very similar situation where they had been divorced for nearly a decade and he had been thinking about this planning, this doing drive-bys. Now, do you ever see where that anger is not, it was targeted in this case against his ex rather than her new husband?

• 37:36Tristin Engels?

  Unfortunately, yeah, I have seen cases like that. And I'm also somebody who has treated individuals in the justice system. So a lot of, that's a very saturated population of individuals who have done a lot of stalking behaviors and violence. And I have seen cases where there's been a lot of buildup, a lot of fantasizing, a lot of stalking, a lot of life invasion that has built up to something like that. And there's a lot of different variables that play into that and a lot of different personality traits that also fuel behavior like that. But I have come across that. I do find that that's more common in males than it is in females. And that's just been my personal experience in, as a forensic psychologist,

• 38:19Tristin Engels?

  working professionally. And it really does vary case by case. But I do, I have seen that, yeah.

• 38:27Speaker 02

  It's weird because, and I could be totally wrong, but in my opinion, I would think from a female's perspective, you think you're eliminating the threat and that then you'll be able to step back into that role as the girlfriend, whereas the guy, it would seem like he arguably wants to punish you.

• 38:41Tristin Engels?

  Yeah, he want, but he's, but it's more about like, if I can't have you, no one can.

• 38:46Speaker 02

  Exactly.

• 38:47Tristin Engels?

  That's the mentality.

• 38:48Speaker 02

  Not like, let's kill your husband, so I'll be your husband again.

• 38:49Tristin Engels?

  Exactly.

• 38:50Speaker 02

  Whereas that's what the girls are thinking.

• 38:52Tristin Engels?

  The girls are thinking that way, but the men are like, if I can't have you, no one can, I'm taking, I'm annihilating. It's like an annihilation sort of mentality. Annie, I've been loving this discussion. Thank you so much for being here and for having this discussion with me, but let's get right back into Brenda Delgado. And thank you so much for being here.

• 39:11Speaker 02

  Thank you for having me.

• 39:15Vanessa Richardson?

  By the fall of 2015, Crystal Cortez and Christopher Love had both been charged with capital murder for their roles in Dr. Kendra Hatcher's death. Crystal accepted a plea deal and was sentenced to 35 years in prison, but Christopher refused to testify against anyone. The only suspect left to apprehend was Brenda Delgado herself. But when authorities tried to track her down, she was gone. Just two days after her initial questioning, Brenda had boarded a bus to Mexico. She stayed with relatives in a rural part of the country and kept a low profile. She knew how important it was not to draw any attention to herself.

• 39:58Tristin Engels?

  Fleeing in a situation like this is often driven by avoidance, fear, and overconfidence working together. When someone's threat response system is activated, escape from perceived danger becomes a basic instinct. As pressure builds, leaving can feel like regaining control when everything else is feeling out of control. Staying would mean confronting the reality of what she'd done and the legal consequences that come with it. Running delays that confrontation. It doesn't solve the problem, but psychologically it buys time from the emotional weight of the accountability that's coming for her. Let's talk about overconfidence factors into this. Someone in this position may believe that they can start over or keep a low profile and outmaneuver authorities.

• 40:41Tristin Engels?

  A different country can feel like insulation and a layer of protection in the same way that Brenda felt using Jose, Crystal, and Christopher insulated her from the crime. You can see a similar pattern of overconfidence in Kaitlyn Armstrong's case, which we also covered and we talked about in episode one. Once Kaitlyn realized authorities were closing in, she fled to Costa Rica. In both situations, fleeing is more about an awareness of consequences paired with an inability or an unwillingness to face them. What does this suggest about Brenda's mentality? And do you think she finally realized she had no shot at the future with Ricky she'd been dreaming of? I think this is a major shift because to flee to another country and to maintain

• 41:23Tristin Engels?

  a low profile suggests that Ricky is not even on her mind, nor is a future with him. I think her focus has shifted entirely into self-preservation and survival, and her future now is about managing consequences. I'm not even sure if the reality that there will never be a future with Ricky has even had a chance to sink in yet at this point.

• 41:44Vanessa Richardson?

  Well, if Brenda thought authorities would give up on finding her, she was wrong. They issued a warrant for her arrest on charges of capital murder, but despite the public being put on high alert, months passed without any sign of her. On April 16, 2016, she was added to the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list. At the time, she was the ninth woman to ever end up on it. The authorities also issued a $100,000 reward for information on her whereabouts. And that same month, someone came forward with Brenda's location. The FBI worked with Mexican authorities to zero in on Brenda. Within days, they had her surrounded. Brenda didn't put up a fight as she was placed under arrest.

• 42:29Vanessa Richardson?

  When Brenda arrived at the Dallas airport, Detective Eric Barnes was there, waiting for her. As soon as she stepped off the plane, they made eye contact while he cast her an expression as if to say, "I told you I'd find you." Still, Brenda maintained her composure. Part of the reason for her calm demeanor might have been the fact that she knew she wouldn't face the harshest consequences. Brenda had dual US and Mexican citizenship, and under the terms of Mexico's extradition laws, she could not face the death penalty. Brenda Delgado was finally behind bars. She pleaded not guilty. Now, the Dallas DA's office just had to solidify their case against her. In the meantime, Christopher's case moved forward.

• 43:14Vanessa Richardson?

  He went to trial first in October of 2018. As promised, Crystal testified against him. While she'd agreed to do so in exchange for a lesser sentence, she also explained that her mother had convinced her to do the right thing. Crystal said her mom had visited her in prison and told her how disappointed in her she was. Then, in November 2017, about a year before Christopher's trial, Crystal's mom passed away from kidney disease. If Crystal had ever felt unsure about testifying against Christopher, those feelings were gone once she lost her mom. And when she took the stand, she spared no detail.

• 43:56Tristin Engels?

  Grief often intensifies reflection. People will think about legacy, values, and whether they're living in a way their loved ones would be proud of. That can strengthen motivation to set things right, especially when someone is already facing consequences and looking for a better path forward. Testifying fully may have felt like honoring her mother's wishes, or at least trying to move closer to the person her mother wanted her to be or who she's starting to identify more with. She's also a mother herself, and the impact of her choices and how they've affected her family is likely becoming clearer. She can't maintain a good relationship with her mother now, but maybe she can preserve one with her child. Grief can clarify values, reduce tolerance for internal conflict, and push someone toward choices

• 44:41Tristin Engels?

  that align more with their conscience.

• 44:44Vanessa Richardson?

  What prevents someone like Crystal from using the same moral compass before they commit a violent crime?

• 44:50Tristin Engels?

  We talked about this a little in episode one, but it's such an important question because it forces us to remember that most people who make poor or terrible decisions like Crystal still have a moral compass. Before the crime, Crystal wasn't sitting down and thinking about who she could kill, or at least that we know of. I highly doubt this was something she ever saw herself doing. Instead, it seems like she was caught in a mix of emotional influence, loyalty, financial stress, and the desire to please someone she admired. There's also the way harm can escalate gradually. People don't usually leap straight to serious violence. The situation unfolds in steps, and each step can feel smaller than it really is. Brenda started that process by speaking negatively about Ricky and Kendra,

• 45:35Tristin Engels?

  likely also appealing to Crystal's own relational experiences as a single, struggling mother, and escalated from there. It's just now with this loss and the consequences, it allowed her to see it more clearly. And it's important to be clear about something here. Understanding the psychological factors that influenced Crystal does not excuse her actions. Many people experience stress, loyalty conflicts, or emotional pressure and vulnerabilities, and they don't participate in violence. These explanations are about context, not justification. Crystal still made a choice, and that choice had irreversible consequences. These insights are intended to help us understand how someone might get to that point. It is not intended to remove accountability for the harm that was done.

• 46:21Vanessa Richardson?

  All Crystal could do now was own up to everything, and that's what she did. In the end, her testimony led the jury to deliberate against Christopher for three hours before finding him guilty of capital murder. He was sentenced to death by lethal injection. He would go on to appeal the sentence, which made it all the way to the United States Supreme Court in 2022. He claimed that one of the jurors was racially biased against him, but the judges ultimately ruled against his appeal. As of this recording, Christopher is still on death row, and a Dallas judge has yet to set an execution date. Meanwhile, in June 2019, several months after Christopher's trial wrapped,

• 47:05Vanessa Richardson?

  Brenda finally faced a jury of her peers. Prosecutors described her obsession with Ricky and Kendra, and said she couldn't live with the fact that Ricky had moved on and chose someone else to spend his life with. They said her envy was so strong, all she could think about was destroying Kendra. So she asked multiple people to help her, until she found two who would.

• 47:29Tristin Engels?

  I think envy is definitely a part of this. That's very clear. But I don't think it's the entire picture. Many people are envious of others, and they don't go on to orchestrate a brutal murder like this. It's when envy is mixed with deeper personality patterns and cognitive distortions that it becomes dangerous. It's never just one thing, but rather a combination of things. And in Brenda's case, the jealousy toward Kendra wasn't just a case of wishing she had what Kendra had. It appeared to evolve into thinking, she has something that should be mine. That's entitlement. When someone perceives something like this as a personal injustice, rather than, you know, life, the emotional reaction to that intensifies. Ruminations and obsession can grow.

• 48:13Tristin Engels?

  She also may have experienced identity threat. She seemed to have felt she lost a future that she had built her identity around, much like with Caitlyn Armstrong. And when a person ties their self-worth to a relationship or a future with that relationship, a loss can feel like a loss of self. That can drive rigid, desperate attempts to restore control. And under emotional strain, people can become fixated on a single solution to their pain. Instead of adapting to loss, their thinking becomes tunnel-visioned. They see one solution to reduce the anxiety or threat, and that's removing the obstacle. And with rigid thinking, sometimes the only solution that they can think of is extreme. So in Brenda's case, it started with envy and jealousy,

• 48:56Tristin Engels?

  but there was so much more to it than that.

• 48:59Vanessa Richardson?

  What are your thoughts on the prosecution's strategy as painting Brenda as an obsessive and envious scorned ex-lover?

• 49:06Tristin Engels?

  It was a strategy that was going to resonate with the average juror. They want the jury to understand the case from an emotional level because it's the most effective at securing a verdict, and this is a case that every juror on the stand would likely relate to when framed this way. Most people have had an experience with jealousy in one way or another and can think to themselves, oh, wow, that could have been me, or, oh, wow, my partner had a jealous ex. If you can invoke that kind of fear in the jury, they are more inclined to see Brenda as dangerous, which she is, and therefore more inclined to secure a guilty verdict. But her simply being this envious, scorned ex-lover is also, as I've outlined, an oversimplification in itself. But most legal case strategies are, because you aren't ever going to have a jury full

• 49:50Tristin Engels?

  of psychologists or experts. It just never works that way.

• 49:55Vanessa Richardson?

  As dramatic as the prosecution's story was, it was all believable, especially since they had the testimony of every single person Brenda had asked to help her, including her cousin, who she'd asked to threaten Kendra with a baseball bat, and her former roommate, Jennifer. No one from Brenda's life was willing to help her get away with what she'd done, and that included Ricky. He took the stand to describe his relationship with Brenda and how he started to suspect her of wrongdoing in the aftermath of Kendra's death. The entire time he spoke, he refused to look in Brenda's direction. The only time he did was when he was asked to identify her in the courtroom, and even then, he clearly didn't want to look her in the eyes.

• 50:39Vanessa Richardson?

  But he did. They held each other's gazes for a few moments, and then tears welled in Ricky's eyes. He was overcome with grief as he faced the woman who'd ruined his life. Some of Kendra's family members also took the stand to describe everything that had been taken from them. At 35 years old, Kendra had her whole life ahead of her. She had nieces, nephews, and godchildren who looked up to her. Her patients felt safe with her. She was in love, excited to embark on the next chapter of life with Ricky by her side. When it was the defense's turn to speak, they tried to paint Crystal as the main perpetrator, but they didn't really offer a clear motive as to why she'd want to kill Kendra.

• 51:24Vanessa Richardson?

  Instead, they repeatedly accused her of lying and tried to convince the jury that her testimony couldn't be trusted. But that tactic didn't work. In the end, the jury only deliberated for 20 minutes before finding Brenda Delgado guilty of the murder of Dr. Kendra Hatcher.

• 51:45Tristin Engels?

  I'm typically not present when a jury reaches a verdict because my role in the courtroom happens much earlier in the process and then I'm excused. But when juries arrive at a decision quickly, it's often because the evidence felt clear and the narrative made sense to them. When jurors feel the case is straightforward and there isn't much disagreement among them, deliberations are efficient and quick. That said, jury decision-making is influenced by many factors. Group dynamics matter. Some juries have strong personalities who guide discussion, or they stonewall it, while others reach a verdict independently. Everyone comes with their own perspectives and biases, and that can affect the verdict process as well. There's also the reality of the stress

• 52:30Tristin Engels?

  of a murder trial and the cognitive load that comes with that. Trials are long, and there is a lot of information to take in. There's a lot of pressure to absorb it all, and it's mentally demanding. Jurors are absorbing hours of testimony and technical evidence and legal instructions, some for the very first time ever, while being removed from their normal routines and their families. So fatigue can affect how they proceed from there. External responsibilities can also add background stress, like, you know, having jobs or children or other dependent loved ones that they care for. They're human beings balancing significant pressures while trying to fulfill a very high-pressured civic duty.

• 53:11Tristin Engels?

  That said, a quick verdict doesn't mean that they've decided carelessly necessarily.

• 53:17Vanessa Richardson?

  Do you think in this case, the jury had an easy time arriving at a verdict because the defense didn't have a strong argument? Or maybe because of Christopher and Crystal's prior convictions?

• 53:27Tristin Engels?

  I think that likely played a role because if the defense doesn't present a strong alternative explanation for the evidence, jurors are left with little to weigh against the prosecution's version, especially if that version is more coherent and better-supported. Trials really are a battle of stories. When one story fits the evidence more cleanly and the other side struggles to establish reasonable doubt, deliberations tend to move more quickly. But that said, credibility also matters. It usually does. Jurors are instructed to use prior legal history only in very specific ways and to negate prior legal history in very specific ways. So it's depending on what the judge allows.

• 54:09Tristin Engels?

  But information about someone's past can still influence how believable their testimony feels. It doesn't prove guilt on its own, but it can shape how jurors interpret denials or inconsistencies, or how they show up in the courtroom. Ultimately, quick verdicts usually reflect the total picture. If the evidence, the testimony, and the overall story leave jurors feeling there is little reasonable doubt, they will reach a verdict faster.

• 54:38Vanessa Richardson?

  In Brenda's case, it was hard to find anyone who wasn't convinced of her guilt. She was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Everything Brenda did was to win Ricky back. But in the end, her plan backfired. She didn't just lose him, she lost her entire life. Now, she'll have to live with the fact that she'll never fall in love and start a family the way she always wanted, nor will she achieve the career goals she held on to for so long. And she's got no one to blame but herself.

• 55:32Vanessa Richardson?

  Thanks so much for listening. Dr. Engels and I will be back next time for a deep dive into the mind of another murderer. Thank you again to our special guest, Annie Elise.

• 55:42Tristin Engels?

  Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is a Crime House original powered by Pave Studios. Here at Crime House, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on all social media at Crime House. And don't forget to rate, review, and follow Serial Killers and Murderous Minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference.

• 56:04Vanessa Richardson?

  And to enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House Plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll get every episode of Serial Killers and Murderous Minds ad-free, along with early access to each thrilling two-part series and exciting bonus content.

• 56:22Vanessa Richardson?

  Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is hosted by me, Vanessa Richardson, and Dr. Tristan Engels, and is a Crime House original powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Serial Killers and Murderous Minds team: Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benedon, Laurie Marinelli, Natalie Pritzowski, Sarah Camp, Sarah Bachelor, Inez Renike, Sarah Tardif, and Kerry Murphy. Thank you for listening.

• 56:58Speaker 05

  Did you know penicillin, the drug that has saved more lives than any other in history, was discovered because a scientist forgot to clean a Petri dish before going on vacation? I'm Connor Tomlinson, and history is my thing, has been my whole life.

• 57:13Speaker 01

  And I'm Carter Roy, and this is What the Fact, the history lesson you actually wished you had in high school, with everything they cut for being too interesting, put back in.

• 57:23Speaker 05

  Every week, we take the wildest true things that ever happened and tell you the whole story behind them.

• 57:29Speaker 01

  I bring the history.

• 57:31Speaker 05

  I bring the facts, the tangents, and the occasional British accent.

• 57:35Speaker 01

  The wildest stuff is real.

• 57:37Speaker 05

  And the real stuff is wilder than you think. New episodes every Wednesday. Follow What the Fact on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or subscribe on YouTube at What the Fact Pod.

• 57:53Speaker 06

  The police closed my sister's case in 2019. Last month, her killer commented on my post. On Reddit, true crime doesn't come from journalists. It comes from the victims, the witnesses, and sometimes the suspects themselves. People post the things they'd never say out loud. Anonymous, unfiltered, and completely real. And every Tuesday, on Crimes of Reddit, we read them out loud. I'm Sabrina Deana-Roga from Two Girls, One Ghost. And I'm Alexis Linkletter from The First Degree. Each week, one of us brings the most unhinged true crime stories the internet has to offer. And the other goes in completely blind. No prep, no spoilers, reacting in real time, same as you. And then we swap.

• 58:35Speaker 06

  And we pull every thread until the whole twisted picture comes into view. It's dark, it's messy, and the scariest part is that these are real stories posted by real people. New episodes drop every Tuesday. Listen to and follow Crimes of Reddit, available now wherever you get your podcasts.

• 58:53Vanessa Richardson?

  If you're looking for your next podcast, check out What the Fact with Connor Tomlinson from Netflix's Love on the Spectrum and Carter Roy. Every week, they take three unbelievable true facts from history and tell you the full story behind them. Follow What the Fact wherever you listen or subscribe on YouTube at What the Fact Pod.