Hi, everybody.
I'm Josh Mankiewicz and we're talking Dateline today with the grumpy curmudgeonly Keith Morrison, which I think sets the tone for the time ahead.
How are you, Mankiewicz?
I'm fine.
This episode is called If These Walls Could Talk.
Now, if you have not listened to this yet, or if you haven't seen it on television, it is the podcast right below this one on the list that you just chose from.
So go there, listen to it, or you want to watch it on TV.
You can do that or stream it on Peacock and then come back here.
Now, today we're going to talk about this episode.
Keith also has an extra clip from his interview with Suzanne's brother Frank, that he's going to play for us.
And later on, the producer of this episode, Michelle Madigan, is going to be here to answer some of your questions about this broadcast from social media.
All right.
Let's talk Dateline.
If These Walls Could Talk.
It's a good title, huh?
It is good.
And I loved your opening lines over the drone shots of you know suburbia with those little identical houses.
You never know what's going on inside.
And it turns out, of course, it's just a cauldron of passion inside them.
Every house is a cauldron of passion, isn't yours?
I think totally.
Yeah.
So to me, one of the first questions I have is this takes so long.
I sort of get the feeling that if this guy had been a truck driver, he might have been prosecuted a lot sooner.
They took more time than at least Hatcher thought that they should have taken.
It was the previous prosecutor who was in the job before her didn't move on it.
But part of the problem was the forensics took a year to come back.
The information that would tell them whether this was a homicide or an accidental fall down a staircase.
Falls happen all the time.
People fall down the stairs and they get killed.
I understand that.
And it certainly, at least at first blush, that was at least plausible.
I guess I'm surprised that it took a year.
I realize that life is not like a, you know, an hour long dramatic TV show in which DNA results come back in 10 seconds.
But, you know, I sort of thought that it would take less than a year to build a case.
They wanted to be very careful.
They wanted to be sure.
Especially when your defendant happens to be a widely admired and respected fertility doctor who is going about the business of helping couples create life, and has been doing so more successfully than most other people in this field for years.
We really saw in this episode, I thought, sort of two different sides of Dr. Sills.
You know, I mean, a couple of different patients.
You know, you saw this side of him that she'd never seen and that most patients never see.
And then the other one is the one that prosecutors, I think, were worried about, which was this, like you know, very decent, you know caring guy who really wanted to give patients this gift of having a child.
Which I should say, 90%.
Probably 99% of his patients would have portrayed him that way.
He was a very kind man who cared a great deal about their success.
And his wife was there at the office, running the office, also doing good work with him.
I mean, he was Suzanne's IVF doctor?
Yes, indeed.
And they start dating and then they get married.
That feels like some kind of ethical issue to me.
Well, it does, doesn't it?
Yeah.
Yeah, she'd been trying to have a baby and was unable to and ran into Dr. Sills and fell for him.
Although her friends would wonder, why did you fall for that guy?
He's such an odd character.
But, you know, she did and they...
Apparently got along very well.
Those twins, those are from the two of them.
Those are not from her previous marriage.
That's correct.
The children felt the relationship was fine.
It was very, very deep inside that relationship where the issues had occurred.
And sometimes, when things are very deep and they're not discussed openly and they fester, the explosive reaction is stronger than it might otherwise be.
I thought the prosecutors sort of offering up the fact that they didn't know what the motive was.
I thought that's like admitting a real weakness to the case.
When they say I'm not required to show motive.
It could have been that he was angry about this relationship that he was having.
It could have been that he wanted her out of the way so he could be with the woman he.
We don't really know.
But what we do know is there was a fight and he killed her.
Eric says he heard his parents yelling.
Was there anything that you heard about what that argument was about?
No, Eric was unable to say or didn't say.
Later denied it.
He supports his father, too, and later denied hearing it at all.
So the 911 call, you know, we start off with him referring to her as a patient.
We've got a patient here who's fallen upstairs and I don't have a pulse.
And he doesn't sound frantic the way I think pretty much anybody would if they discover their wife having just fallen down the stairs and she's not breathing.
You're like, I would not be able to form a complete sentence.
This is a classic situation, Josh, where...
It would be difficult for a detective or a prosecutor to know how much to make of that.
For one thing, everybody reacts differently to stressful situations of that sort.
And they, you know, they get charged with a crime because they're too calm in the 911 call.
Other people are frantic and over the top.
As a doctor who had for years and years been treating people in difficult situations, had trained extensively not just in IVF but in all kinds of doctoring in order to get his advanced degree.
You know he would know to treat somebody calmly and dispassionately if he wanted to have any success.
Okay.
He'd also know how to do CPR.
Right.
That was the impression that the 911 operator had, that he wasn't doing CPR.
That's not what his daughter says.
That's not what he says.
I mean, that's one of the first things I wrote down when I was watching your episode.
It was like, as a doctor, wouldn't he know to perform CPR like right away?
Wouldn't the 911 call have come with him in the midst of the compressions?
Well, as long as we're talking spoilers, it clearly was a play.
And the thing that told the story, of course, was the lividity.
Lividity, as you know, is the blood that coagulates in the part of your body which is lower down after you die.
The blood stops pumping.
It goes to that part of your body.
That part of your body turns purple.
And that's that.
It tells you how the body was lying when you died.
And the lividity in her body was up the stairs where her head was at the bottom of the stairs.
So it defied the laws of gravity.
It could not possibly have happened that way.
It means the body was staged.
It's just no question about it.
I mean, again, this is a doctor.
He's got some medical training.
How is he not going to know that?
He should know that.
He probably wasn't thinking very clearly.
How does he think ligature strangulation is not going to show up in an autopsy?
How does he think this extremely visible blood and hair in the room is not going to be seen?
I mean, like...
There was a dispute over whether her blood was found as well as his blood in that child's bedroom.
The defense argued it was just his blood.
Yes, they found her DNA, but she was sleeping in that room after all, so of course they would.
So the idea is that she touches the wall, thus leaving her DNA.
She touches the curtain in the wall and then he bleeds on that.
And that that's the combined DNA.
I don't know what DNA experts would say about that.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I've been doing this for a while.
Yeah.
When we come back, we're going to have more from Keith's interview with Suzanne's brother, Frank.
So one of the things that was very cool about this story, I thought, was that you had so much video of Suzanne when she was alive.
That usually does not happen.
You know, her audition for Survivor and, you know, the videos she made with her daughter.
For our purposes.
It's just wonderful because it's an opportunity for the audience to see what these people are really like.
And we don't have to do anything.
We just let it play, which was great.
Yep.
Brought her alive in a very significant way.
You just need to know people.
You do.
You need to know people.
And you're obviously not going to get it from her husband.
He's not talking.
And I thought her, you know, the kids are not talking.
And her mom I thought was the strongest person sort of it was clear that she was talking to her mom all the way through.
I don't know how much she was talking to everybody else in her family, but clearly, like her mom, remained sort of a confidant and a close friend all her life.
She was a great interview.
She is smart and she's attentive and she cares about things.
Her mother Interestingly, lives in Florida, but she was in California where we did the interview at our little studio, the two of us sitting there together.
But it was very chilly that day, California chilly which you know can feel cold in the bones, even though it's California.
Right.
And our studio is not heated.
She was cold.
And rightly so.
She was wearing pretty thin clothing.
So we got a blanket. quite a large warm green blanket and draped it around her.
And if you look carefully at the picture of her interview, it looks you know, it looks like a a very attractive cloak that you would have bought at some fancy store.
In fact, it was a blanket that we were using.
That's actually Dateline Supply.
Yes, exactly right.
Oh, nice.
That's good to know.
So you have a lot of exclusive interviews in this, people who have not spoken before.
Luckily so.
The creation of the producers we work with, very effective.
Let's give a shout out to the producers who worked on this.
This is Michelle Madigan's show, and I thought she did a wonderful job.
Queen of Orange County.
Yeah, you bet.
Let's hear that clip that you brought, which is from Suzanne's brother, Frank.
Now, this didn't air in the episode, but in this little bit of interview Frank is talking about why it was that he wanted to sit down and talk with us.
Since her death.
There's so little footprint out there for Suzanne, for the type of person that she was and for what she was to her family, what she meant to me and my family.
And I just feel like a lot of that's been lost and it's like in some, In some senses, you wouldn't even know that she lived anymore.
History folded over her and she disappeared.
Yeah, and this is important for me to do because, even if this is concentrating on parts of her life that I would rather not think about or talk about or have to contemplate, anything that can allow her legacy to exist in any kind of preserved format I wanted to be involved in.
I think that's one of the reasons that people sit down and talk with Dateline, which is we're going to tell this story in some depth.
It's not going to be six inches in the local newspaper.
It's not going to be 45 seconds to a minute on the local news.
It's going to be a much more... complete telling of their life.
They're going to get a fuller picture of what happened and who they were.
I think so.
Although we make it clear that it's entirely up to them.
They don't want to talk on television.
We're not going to make them feel bad if they don't.
And we're not going to chase them down the street if they don't want to talk.
No, certainly not.
Certainly not.
And I would love to have heard from the children.
I really would have.
No one wants to admit that dad killed mom.
No, but I wouldn't have expected them to admit that anyway.
How you could kill your kid's parent.
I just do not.
I do not fathom how that happens, but it does happen, clearly all the time.
My impression was the guy must have snapped, that he didn't often snap, that he rarely snapped, but when he did it was.
A big storm.
It suggests that sort of the jury got it right.
This was second degree murder.
This was not something he planned out in advance.
This just happened in the moment because he was unable to control whatever temper was sort of lying beneath the surface there.
This was a very thoughtful jury.
I thought it was a very good jury.
I've talked to a lot of juries in the past and sometimes you walk out and shake your head, but this one was a good jury.
I remember when we first started covering crime, we used to make a big effort to get the jury.
And we would try to get as many of them as we could, and then we'd line them up.
Sometimes we had everybody.
Uh, we have all, all 12 people, the chairs ranked in rows.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Like a little risers.
I remember that.
Yeah.
And that, that was usually a big part of the, of the storytelling.
And uh Over time, I guess in part because sometimes people don't want to talk, we stop doing that as much.
So the jury does not turn up in every dateline hour or two hour.
But sometimes when they do, as in this case, they tell a really interesting part of the story.
So when you were shooting in San Clemente, when you were out on the street with the detectives, I heard that you attracted a crowd, which does not surprise me.
Everybody wants to know about this weird, strange gentleman, Mankiewicz, that I work with.
How to get in touch with them.
I don't think that's what they wanted to know.
So how many people came out and said, oh my gosh, it's Keith Morrison.
What are you doing here?
Nobody.
Nobody, Josh.
That's not what I heard.
So now I'm going to tell a story.
Oh, gosh.
Every now and then, dear viewers, I'm in Keith's presence in public.
That doesn't happen very often, because usually we're covering separate stories, separate parts of the country.
But sometimes we're in the same place.
And then people come up to Keith, to you, and they say –
Oh my gosh, I love you.
You're so great.
I love watching you.
And Keith has this expression.
I don't like this one that he's got right now where he's like, who is it you've mistaken me for?
And I'm like, no, it's you.
They know who you are.
No, no, they figured it out.
They know exactly who you are and they love you.
No, no.
It's just easier to approach an old and wrinkled guy who's not going to be a threatening one.
No, no, no.
I didn't realize this until after I saw the episode, but many years ago, Also in San Clemente, same place that this story happened I covered a story about a former Jeopardy champion, a guy named Paul Curry, who was accused, and then later convicted, of killing his wife Linda.
By overdosing her with nicotine.
I remember that story.
The coverage of that story went on forever, didn't it?
That was only a couple of miles away.
That was only a few miles away from where this happened.
Well, I recall two things about that story.
One, I think I probably was annoyed with you for poaching on my territory.
You absolutely were annoyed with me.
You absolutely were annoyed with me.
I remember that.
The payback was it took you a long time to do that story.
It did take me a long time to do that story.
Yes.
Okay.
Now, after the break, the producer of this broadcast, Michelle Madigan, is going to be here to help us answer some of your questions from social media.
Thank you.
Okay, so now we're going to take some of your questions from social media.
And here to answer some of those questions is the woman who produced this episode and many other Dateline episodes Michelle Madigan.
Hi, Michelle.
Hi, Josh.
Great to see you.
So our first question is from somebody named Lester.
He writes in to say...
Josh, please tell Keith to stop sending me tuna casserole recipes.
They're all, you know what?
That's a text.
That is not a, that's not viewer mail.
Sorry.
Nevermind.
Sorry.
I got that wrong.
Let's go to viewer mail.
Mike 1990 says, I love the jury's thoughts on the process of getting to their decision.
Great insight.
How hard is it to book jurors, Michelle?
It can be super easy or it can be really difficult.
When we sit through jury selection, we know very little about these jurors.
The way the jury service works, it's anonymous.
We don't know their names.
And so it's really up to them to contact us after they're done being jurors.
And you hope that they call you.
And sometimes they do and sometimes they don't.
But we find that a lot of them find the experience of talking about it really interesting.
So when I saw this comment come in on Friday, I was very grateful because you know that was an element that I wanted to have in the story.
And I thought it would be interesting to hear what they had to say.
And I'm glad that Mike agreed.
So here's the same comment from three viewers, which something Keith and I talked about a little bit from Susan Whitehill, Katie Augenbaugh and Sylvia NYC, who's a longtime friend of ours, on social.
They all want to know the same thing.
How would a doctor not know CPR?
You know, wouldn't a doctor not need to be told how to do that?
You know, if I were a doctor, I think I probably would know CPR.
If I were a doctor who had just killed my wife and was trying to cover it up.
I think that's particularly when I'd at least be practicing my CPR.
Why he wouldn't be going through the motions better than he did, I don't quite get.
This was always what I was listening to every time I heard that 911 call, because he starts the call saying I've got a patient who's fallen off stairs.
But he never actually says to the dispatcher, I'm a doctor.
I know how to do CPR.
And that, I think, was... a problem for him when it came to the jury.
Jorge Jr., my love, wrote in to say children always suffer the most in the long run.
It's got to be brutally difficult outside of the evidence.
I mean, that's a feeling that you're.
You know, who wants to lose both their parents because of the same thing that you don't really understand, that you weren't a part of.
We reached out to those kids.
I know we would have in the normal course of business.
You get anywhere with them?
Yes.
I mean, I actually did speak with Eric following the verdict.
And it was a really hard conversation.
And I think he appreciated my empathy in wanting to hear from him and in understanding that it would be a difficult conversation to have.
Um, I'm a mother of two and this is always.
The hardest part for me is when I'm meeting the kids and speaking with them and trying to understand how hard it would be to be in their shoes.
Also, you know, somebody in Eric's position is caught between two competing interests.
One is his desire to see his father acquitted.
And the second is to tell his story completely.
And one may not help the other.
Right.
So a couple other things.
Keith and I talked about this earlier, but I want to get your take on it too.
Lily Bondi, who's a old friend of ours here on social, says uh, So weird to go with your husband to a fertility doctor and then leave your husband for the fertility doctor.
How does that even happen?
And that would be my question.
How does that even happen?
I spoke with her husband that she was married to at the time.
He was very nice.
He was very careful not to get into too much detail about that part of their story.
He said, you know, there's some filings from the divorce that you're welcome to get.
And so I got his divorce filings and I got Dr. Sills' divorce filings.
And I tried to figure this out, the timing of it.
Dr. Sills' ex-wife...
Accused him of infidelity.
And I just like I put it together, that that would have been Suzanne and there had to have been an overlap.
I just don't know how that relationship developed.
And so I wasn't able to really add that to our reporting.
That was good.
Thank you.
Let's go to something else.
A bunch of people wrote in to talk about similarities between this case and the Michael Peterson case, in which an owl played a perhaps a fateful part.
Lauren Ingram said, oh, my God, the owl.
I mean, dog did do it.
The dog, and his thirst for pig ears made him obviously filled with murderous rage at likely the woman who feeds him.
Yeah.
No one bought the dog defense.
Yeah, I don't.
I don't think anybody bought it, but it was certainly an interesting approach.
And Jack Early is one of my favorite defense attorneys that I've had the opportunity.
This was my second case that I've covered that he's been involved with.
And I respect him as an attorney.
And when he felt so strongly about this theory that he wanted to take it to a jury, I thought okay, like I'm going to see where this goes.
I mean, even if you believe that the dog grabs the scarf when it's around her neck, like you've got to compress someone's neck for a very long time to kill them.
That's not going to happen in two seconds.
During the course of the trial, we got a puppy.
And so it was really interesting to sort of see like just how ferocious she could pull on something.
And so I would come home and be like, can you pull on something like for an extended amount of time?
And And the answer is no.
Like they don't have that attention span.
It's a shorter attention span to be pulling on a scarf.
I don't know why I brought my puppy who's like lovely and sleeping right next to me.
She's actually doing a good job.
It's interesting how this like, are you like this with every story?
Like you're testing out the theory with your dog and you know you got kids.
You're thinking about that yourself.
I mean, you definitely feel everything about these stories, which I think is actually probably a pretty good thing.
I do.
I get, I get.
I get a little invested in my stories because I want to know and I like to sort of understand it.
You know, on on both sides.
All right.
Michelle Madigan, you have just talked yourself into future appearances on Talking Dateline.
You were very good at this.
Thank you.
So that's Talking Dateline for this week.
Thank you, Keith, for joining us.
Thank you, Michelle Madigan, for coming in to answer social questions.
It was great to be here.
If any of you have any questions about this broadcast or any other, you can get to us on social at DatelineNBC.
As always, thanks for listening.
See you Fridays on Dateline on NBC.
