He almost got away with it. Almost, but not quite. Listen to the stunning conclusion of what happens when suspect Daniel Garcia is asked to simply tell the truth about what happened to Saba Girmai back in 1985. This is the final episode of our first limited edition series, Silicon Valley Beat: Major Crimes. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________[[Disclaimer: The Silicon Valley Beat, Major Crimes, is a podcast that deep-dives into major cases investigated by the Mountain View Police Department. Because this podcast covers investigations including critical incidents and homicides, what we discuss here may contain material that is not suitable for all listeners. Names and other sensitive information may be changed to protect the identity of the innocent.]]On last week’s episode -- investigators were finally able to meet the man they thought was a suspect in the death of 21-year-old Ethiopian immigrant Saba Girmai. But over the course of a two hour conversation, Daniel Garcia, suspect number one, suddenly began to break any and all theories about his involvement in the case, providing reasonable doubt at every turn. Then suddenly, the course of the conversation changes, and finally, the death of Saba Girmai may see some closure.This is the Silicon Valley Beat: Major Crimes.[[opening bumper]]Episode 5: Case ClosedSaul Jaeger: “I got a lot to lose.” That was the moment that changed everything for Detective Chris Kikuchi and Investigator Nate Wandruff. Everything that had been assumed, every second that they felt their one shot at solving this case was slipping away, suddenly, they were right back in it. Chris Kikuchi: When we first met, we always like to establish rapport with someone. We’ve never met them before. We asked questions related to his family, and he was very talkative, which is good, because anytime someone will speak, we just like letting them continue on as long as they do. Because we want that person to become comfortable speaking with the police. And he was. Katie Nelson: Let’s look at that a little more closely. Why is rapport with anyone, but particularly a suspect, so important in investigations? According to the work Investigative Interviewing: Rights, Research, Regulation, published in 2006, rapport with an interview subject, including suspects, in a criminal case, is “the heart of the interview.” In fact, in a study titled: Police Interviewing and Interrogation, establishing some kind of rapport with a suspect was the fourth most used technique during questioning. In short, rapport in this case was a huge factor in establishing any sort of communication line between Daniel Garcia and the detectives. Having never met before, this rapport was vital to establishing a quick, but solidly built, foundation on which the interview could continue in hopes of having any resolution to the case. Chris Kikuchi: He kind of portrayed himself as pretty relaxed as he was speaking with us. He was very talkative. He wasn’t asking too many questions, which you kind of expect. If detectives come out to speak with you during a probation meeting, he wasn’t asking a lot of questions, which I thought was peculiar. Saul Jaeger: “Peculiar,” Kikuchi said. Remember, Kikuchi was concerned that this expedition down to Fresno would not lead to any results and thus far, he seemed to be somewhat right. But was Daniel Garcia’s lack of questions proof of his innocence? Or perhaps, proof that maybe, there is something more there? Chris Kikuchi: As we were speaking, he just basically got into a little more detail about an incident that occurred regarding her basically stating she had scratched him. And that was how the DNA was under her fingernails. Unprovoked, she had scratched him. Again, that’s during some incident where she was asking him for food or alcohol. He said no. She scratched him. So, that’s how he kind of explained the DNA. Katie Nelson: A perfectly plausible reason for why Daniel Garcia’s DNA was underneath Saba’s fingernails. The fact that we had the DNA at all was extraordinary, as you learned back in Episode 2. And, if Daniel Garcia had stuck with that story in fact, he would have technically been the victim of an assault. Chris Kikuchi: At that point, he kept on mentioning that, he never admitted harming her or doing anything to her at that point. So we just kind of stressed, “Look, just tell us the truth, that’s all we want. We just want hte truth.” At which point, then he started giving a little bit more. He said something to the effect of “I have a lot to lose.” Then he finally gave a little bit more detail and description as to what happened during the incident. We’re getting something now, right? And we just wanted him to continue talking. Saul Jaeger: And there was about to be another bombshell.Katie Nelson: Similar to other episodes, what you are about to hear is actual ...
