Connect with us

News

A murder, a manhunt and the grandmother who wouldn’t stop the search for her daughter’s killer

Published

on

A murder, a manhunt and the grandmother who wouldn’t stop the search for her daughter’s killer

She’d waited years for the news.

But when the message arrived Aug. 26, 2022, Josephine Wentzel suddenly had to confront an agonizing possibility. She’d spent six years tracking the man authorities believed was responsible for killing her daughter, a search that spanned thousands of miles, international borders and dozens of possible sightings that, in the end, had produced little.

Wentzel declined to identify the message’s sender, but she said it supposedly contained a recent picture of Raymond McLeod, who at the time was one of the U.S. Marshals Service’s most wanted fugitives. Had he actually been found — or would this be another jolt of false hope?

She focused in on the image, she said, and “just freaked out like, oh, my gosh, it’s him. I didn’t even want to think it because someone might hear my thoughts and warn him to flee.”

McLeod, a 42-year-old former U.S. Marine, was apprehended in El Salvador days later and is awaiting trial in San Diego on a charge of first-degree murder in the June 2016 strangulation of Krystal Mitchell. He pleaded not guilty and is scheduled for a preliminary hearing in March. His attorneys either declined to comment or did not respond to a request for comment. In court filings, they said McLeod accidentally killed Mitchell during “rough, consensual sex gone wrong.”

Advertisement

Wentzel, a 67-year-old grandmother and former police detective had been preparing for life as an RV’ing snowbird when her daughter was killed. She has used the improbable platform she developed pursuing McLeod to write two books — “The Chase” and “The Capture” — and to help other grieving parents navigate the mix of frustration, despair and confusion left by an unsolved homicide.

Wentzel has assisted a nonprofit that helps law enforcement agencies with a series of cases in recent years, including the disappearance and alleged murder of Maya Millete, according to the Cold Case Foundation’s co-executive director. Through a nonprofit Wentzel established, Angels of Justice, she launched a campaign urging the White House to treat the country’s massive backlog of unsolved murders as a national emergency.

In a statement, a White House spokeswoman blamed former President Joe Biden for failing to enable law enforcement agencies to “truly fight crime” and said that President Donald Trump is “restoring integrity to our justice system.”

A spokesperson for the Marshals Service, which apprehended McLeod, declined to comment on questions about Wentzel’s role in finding him, but in a statement after McLeod’s capture the agency’s director said Wentzel had worked “diligently with law enforcement these past years to see this day of justice arrive.”

The San Diego County District Attorney’s Office has said she was “instrumental” in the search for McLeod.

Advertisement

“She goes for it,” said Pat Kuiper, who credits Wentzel with helping push investigators in Washington state to take another look at the nearly two-decade-old unsolved murder of her son. “She goes for it in such a way that people can’t really refuse her, because she’s so genuine and kind, but persistent, assertive.”

For Rachel Glass, whose daughter was found strangled along with her pregnant roommate in Arizona 15 years ago, Wentzel provided an empathetic ear and insight into an investigative process that Glass — a longtime nurse — knew nothing about.

“If there are things that go on and you think, what the hell is this, I’d call her and say, you won’t believe what’s happened now,” Glass recalled. “And she might tell me x, y and z about why it has to play out like that.”

Wentzel’s husband of nearly three decades, a retired post office maintenance engineer, attributes her latest chapter to the tenacity she’s always shown.

“That’s something I lack,” he said. “I can get easily discouraged and say, forget it. But my wife, she’s not gonna forget it.”

Advertisement

A deadly date in San Diego

For Wentzel, that chapter began soon after the death of her daughter. According to a statement of facts filed by the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office, McLeod had gotten into a fight at a San Diego bar June 9, 2016, after he grabbed Mitchell by the throat and a man intervened, telling him to stop.

Krystal Mitchell.Courtesy Josephine Wentzel

Mitchell was found dead the next day at the apartment where they were staying. According to the statement, a deputy medical examiner determined she had been strangled and later compared the severity of the injury to someone who’d been struck with a baseball bat or had their neck stomped on.

Mitchell, 30, had been visiting the city with McLeod from Phoenix, where the divorced mother of two worked as a property manager, Wentzel said. To her mother, Mitchell was the life of the party — and someone who turned heads whenever she walked into a room.

Mitchell met McLeod through work a few weeks before — he’d gone to her office to rent an apartment, her mother said — and they’d traveled to San Diego. Mitchell was impressed by how much McLeod seemed to care for his young son, Wentzel said, and she didn’t appear to know about his previous allegations of domestic violence.

One of those alleged incidents occurred not long before their trip, court records in California show. In Riverside County, he was charged that April with inflicting corporal injury on a spouse — an alleged crime that involved accusations that he strangled his wife, according to the statement of facts.

Advertisement

McLeod pleaded not guilty, the Riverside County records show, and in a filing his lawyers in Mitchell’s case have said that he has a “history of consensual sexual practices that included elements of the BDSM community such as bondage, whipping, slapping, choking and erotic asphyxiation, sometimes to unconsciousness.”

That earlier case was not adjudicated, however, and McLeod disappeared after Mitchell’s death. According to prosecutors, on June 10, he allegedly drove Mitchell’s car to San Diego International Airport, where he rented another car and headed to Mexico.

An international search

The San Diego Police Department identified McLeod as a person of interest in Mitchell’s death almost immediately. A warrant seeking his arrest in her murder was filed June 13.

But McLeod was nowhere to be found. Eventually, Wentzel recalled, the Marshals Service got involved and offered a reward. But she became frustrated with the government’s inability to quickly investigate leads in foreign countries, she said. U.S. embassies seemed less than enthusiastic about helping, she said, and she recalled a deputy marshal telling her that they couldn’t just “run in and get the guy.”

“It’s another country,” she recalled him saying. “We got to get approval.”

Advertisement

The Marshals Service declined to comment. The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

So Wentzel began searching herself. Although she’d worked for several years as a police officer and detective in her native Guam decades ago, she said that experience didn’t begin to prepare her for the years of social media sleuthing that she was about to embark on.

One of her first steps was to pull together a “wanted” poster with pictures of McLeod, along with a brief description of the slaying and the reward amount — at the time $5,000, she said. She focused on Belize, a place she’d heard he might be, and circulated information among dozens of Facebook accounts — gyms and resorts, restaurants and a university, screenshots of the messages show.

Raymond McLeod.
Raymond McLeod.San Diego County Crime Stoppers

After posting the information to a buy/sell group, Wentzel recalled, the responses started rolling in. Some were by phone. Others came via WhatsApp or Facebook.

“Madam I saw this man I am sure of it from his tattoos and his face,” one message read, according to a screenshot.

“If he is here he will b caught,” read another.

Advertisement

But then, he wasn’t. And the messages continued. There were tips that he was in Honduras, that he was in Guatemala. Some tipsters seemed to legitimately want to help, she said. Others seemed like scammers.

“One guy contacted me and said, OK, he’s here,” she recalled. “I know where he’s working at. I’ve got pictures. I’ve got all this. So, you know, I need you to send me $1,000.”

There were so many tips, said Mike Wentzel, that fielding them became a 24/7 job for his wife. At times, he considered asking her to dial things back, but never could.

“This is her child,” he said. “How can I tell her to stop?”

But there were times when the thought crossed her mind. Keeping hope alive during the pandemic, when that steady flow of tips dried up, was especially difficult, she said.

Advertisement

The final tip

As this slump in information dragged on, Wentzel said, local and federal officials announced that McLeod had been added to the Marshals’ list of its 15 most wanted fugitives. In the spring 2021 announcement, they also announced that the reward for information leading to McLeod’s arrest had grown to $50,000.

His last known location was in Guatemala in 2017, the officials said.

Wentzel said she believes it was a tip linked to that Central American country that ultimately led to McLeod’s capture. Five years after he was spotted in Guatemala, she said, a couple of tipsters told her they’d seen McLeod at a hotel just north of the country’s border with El Salvador.

Wentzel surveyed YouTube videos from the hotel to see if she could spot his face, she recalled, and she posted a “wanted” ad on Facebook that targeted accounts in the area. Wentzel said she set a 100-mile radius for the ad, meaning that everyone in that zone would see McLeod’s face.

Eventually, Wentzel said, she learned from the Marshals Service that someone saw one of her ads and shared a brochure with authorities that appeared to show McLeod. The brochure was from a Salvadoran English school not far from the Guatemalan hotel, she said.

Advertisement

It was this image that prompted Wentzel to conclude: “It’s him.”

Four days later, on Aug. 30, 2022, authorities announced that McLeod had been taken into custody in Sonsonate, El Salvador, where he’d been teaching English. He landed in San Diego the next day.

Wentzel wrestled with a tangle of emotion as McLeod’s arraignment approached. She thought about her daughter’s final moments and ticked through a litany of revenge fantasies, she recalled. But she didn’t want to stew in hatred and bitterness. So she tried to focus on her daughter’s children, whom she and her husband have raised, and on the other victims she’s sought to help.

“Murder does this to you — it makes you somebody you’re not, if you allow it,” she said. “I didn’t picture living my life out like this. I wanted to be a grandma and I just wanted to travel and have fun and live the rest of my life out with my family. But it made me something else.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Map: 5.1-Magnitude Earthquake Strikes off the Coast of California

Published

on

Map: 5.1-Magnitude Earthquake Strikes off the Coast of California

Advertisement

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

A moderately strong, 5.1-magnitude earthquake struck in the North Pacific Ocean on Wednesday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 5:45 a.m. Pacific time about 40 miles west of Petrolia, Calif., data from the agency shows.

Advertisement

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Aftershocks detected

Subsequent quakes have been reported in the same area. Such temblors are typically aftershocks caused by minor adjustments along the portion of a fault that slipped at the time of the initial earthquake.

Quakes and aftershocks within 100 miles

Advertisement

Aftershocks can occur days, weeks or even years after the first earthquake. These events can be of equal or larger magnitude to the initial earthquake, and they can continue to affect already damaged locations.

Advertisement

When quakes and aftershocks occurred

 All times are Pacific time. The New York Times

Advertisement

Sources: United States Geological Survey (epicenter, aftershocks, shake intensity); LandScan via Oak Ridge National Laboratory (population density) | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Wednesday, June 3 at 6:03 a.m. Pacific time. Aftershocks data is as of Wednesday, June 3 at 8:01 a.m. Pacific time.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

California’s primary for governor is undecided as candidates vie to be in the top two

Published

on

California’s primary for governor is undecided as candidates vie to be in the top two

Xavier Becerra, Democratic gubernatorial candidate for California, and Steve Hilton, Republican gubernatorial candidate for California, shake hands while arriving for a gubernatorial debate at KRON Studios in San Francisco in April.

Jason Henry/Getty Images North America


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jason Henry/Getty Images North America

SAN FRANCISCO — The primary election for California governor is too close to call, with vote counting continuing Wednesday. Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican business executive Steve Hilton lead the field with Democrat Tom Steyer in third place.

In California’s unusual primary system, all candidates, regardless of party, appear on a single ballot open to any registered voter. The top two candidates then move on to the general election, even if they’re from the same party. This year, voters had 60 names for governor to choose from.

Advertisement

The winner will lead the country’s most populous state, where leaders often take on national political prominence. Incumbent Gov. Gavin Newsom is at his two-term limit and could be a Democratic contender for president.

Becerra, former Health and Human Services secretary under President Joe Biden, pitched himself to voters as an experienced political leader who isn’t afraid of President Trump, but his lead caps one of the most surprising and dramatic comebacks in recent state political history. As recently as April, polls were showing Becerra — also a former member of Congress and California attorney general — languishing in single digits in a crowded field.

In his remarks at his watch party in Los Angeles, Becerra noted his underdog status.

“Here in Hollywood’s hometown, we love a good underdog success story,” he said, drawing parallels between his campaign and his immigrant parents’ success story in California. “Guess what? The underdog stayed in the fight. Like my parents, I never gave up. Never stopped putting one foot in front of the other. Never stopped believing in the beacon-like goodness of California. And thankfully, neither did you.”

Hilton is a former Fox News commentator who also served as a political adviser to former British Prime Minister David Cameron. He was endorsed by President Trump in April, helping him to pull ahead of Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, the other major Republican in the race. Hilton has campaigned on the idea that California needs change after 16 years under total Democratic control.

Advertisement

The race is narrowing down after a tumultuous campaign

At his watch party in Huntington Beach, the British-born candidate — who became an American citizen five years ago — said it was the “honor of his lifetime” to receive over 1 million votes so far.

“Change is coming to California and it’s long overdue,” Hilton said. “We’re not there yet, but it’s looking good. It looks very much as if Californians really will have the chance to vote for change in November and take our state in a new direction.”

Democratic billionaire activist Steyer spent more than $213 million of his own money to boost his candidacy and push a progressive, populist message. While he was trailing Becerra and Hilton on Tuesday night, he said at his watch party in San Francisco that he remains confident he can close the gap in the days ahead.

“Together, we’ve scared the hell out of the corporate interests used to getting their way,” Steyer said. “It might take some time to figure out where this is going. We’re going to wait until every ballot is counted. We’re gonna give democracy a time to work. And we know we finished really strong.”

The early results are not certain to hold, in part because of unusual voting patterns in this primary election: Ballot-tracking data heading into Tuesday evening showed that Republicans were more likely to vote early by mail, while Democratic voters in this deep-blue state held onto their mail-in ballots or chose to vote in person. That’s the reverse of recent elections, which saw more Democrats voting by mail and Republicans tending to vote in person on Election Day.

Advertisement

The uncertainty on election night capped a race that remained crowded and unsettled to the end. To some extent, the race was defined by who wasn’t running.

Some of the state’s most high-profile Democrats — former Vice President Kamala Harris, U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla and California Attorney General Rob Bonta — all passed on a potential bid to succeed Newsom.

The race was disrupted in April when then-U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor imploded amid allegations of sexual assault and harassment. Swalwell resigned from Congress shortly after the accusations surfaced and has denied assault allegations.

Swalwell had been gaining in polls and racking up high-profile endorsements, and his exit seemed to primarily benefit Becerra, who had been stuck in single digits in many polls. Ultimately, it quieted fears among Democrats who worried that the messy Democratic field could result in Bianco and Hilton winning the top spots in the June primary.

Marisa Lagos covers California politics at KQED and co-hosts the Political Breakdown show and podcast.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

Published

on

Supreme Court reinstates Republican-favored Alabama congressional districts

The U.S. Supreme Court

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Alabama to use a congressional district map favored by Republicans.

The court, in an unsigned order, overturned a three-judge district court panel that found that the map is “tainted by intentional race-based discrimination.” The court’s three liberals publicly dissented.

The ruling means that Alabama’s 2026 midterm elections will feature six Republican-leaning districts and one Democratic-leaning one, as opposed to a map with only five safe Republican seats. Democrat Shomari Figures, who represents Alabama’s Second District, will likely lose his seat as a result of the high court’s ruling.

Advertisement

The story of Alabama’s congressional map is long and tortured. It began in 2021, when the state implemented a new map to account for population changes in the census. The map featured only one majority-black district out of seven, even though the state is more than one-quarter Black.

Voters immediately sued, claiming the map illegally diluted minority votes in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. Lower court judges agreed, ruling that the state must draw a map with two districts where Black voters have a realistic chance of electing their candidate of choice. The Supreme Court more than once has ordered Alabama to draw a compliant map.

But the state has refused and instead continued to litigate the case. On Tuesday, that tactic paid off.

What changed? In April, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority all but gutted what remains of the Voting Rights Act, ruling that states cannot purposefully draw districts that are majority-minority.

Alabama then asked the high court to reinstate the state’s old map, under the theory that this new ruling meant that it was permissible to use a map with only one majority-Black district. In an unsigned, unexplained order in May, the high court essentially reversed its previous opinions, and allowed Alabama to use the old map for the upcoming midterm elections.

Advertisement

This set off a flurry of activity in Alabama. By the time the Supreme Court issued its May order, absentee balloting had already begun, using the court-drawn map. So Republican Governor Kay Ivey cancelled elections and scheduled a special primary for August for the affected congressional races.

The case, however, was not over.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court had ordered a lower court panel to continue evaluating Alabama’s map in light of its recent Voting Rights Act decision. And just 15 days after that order, the panel, composed of three Republican judges—two of them Trump appointees—concluded unanimously that even under the Supreme Court’s new standards, the plan for a single black district was “intentionally discriminatory.”

So, once again, Alabama returned to the Supreme Court, arguing that the map was partisan, not racially discriminatory. In short, that the Republican legislature simply drew the map to elect more Republicans. And that under the Supreme Court’s new interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, the GOP map should be allowed to stand.

The court’s conservative agreed, writing that the lower court “did not heed the presumption of legislative good faith.”

Advertisement

The court’s three liberals publicly dissented, castigating the conservative majority for failing to abide by its 2006 decision in the case of Purcell v. Gonzalez. That decision declared that courts should not change election rules too close to an election.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, said the court “debases the democratic process” and “corrodes the rule of law by rewarding Alabama’s gamesmanship and outright defiance of court orders.”

Tuesday’s decision is the latest in a series of Supreme Court rulings that could well reshape the 2026 midterm elections, making it much harder for Democrats to prevail.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending