Episode 2: The Investigation

A 19-year-old woman calls 911 in the middle of the night and tells the operator she’s been shot by an unknown intruder. Police rush to the scene. But years later, the questions about what really happened inside that apartment are still unanswered.

In episode two of the Rachel Hansen case, we move into the hours immediately following Rachel’s murder — the moment when confusion, urgency, and the first pieces of the investigation began to unfold.

We walk through the chilling 911 call Rachel made after she had been shot, the early timeline laid out in police reports, and what we’ve learned through conversations with sources connected to the case. 

As the picture begins to form, we also run into the places where it suddenly stops — large portions of the evidence remain heavily redacted, leaving critical details hidden from public view.

Throughout the episode, we want to acknowledge the people who have worked on this investigation and, most importantly, Rachel’s family and loved ones, who continue to live with the weight of what happened that night.

Piece by piece, investigators began building a picture of what may have happened inside that apartment.

But even now, years later, many of the most important questions remain unanswered.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

Today's episode is sponsored by a woman-owned company that's changing the way we think about personal safety. They create safety tools that are powerful, practical, and actually easy to use, including pepper sprays, training tools, and their patent pending safely sidekick. Because safety shouldn't feel complicated and it definitely shouldn't be a luxury. Being safe should be a given for everyone. Head to livesafely.co and use code BookClub for your discount today.

SPEAKER_00 0:31

Hi, I'm Emily. I'm Ashley. This is Reconsidered Unsolved, where we focus on unsolved cases in the pursuit of justice.

SPEAKER_01 0:41

You are listening to season one, Rachel Hansen. Hi, welcome back to episode two of Rachel Hansen. Last episode, we gave you a brief synopsis of the night Rachel was murdered in the early morning hours of June 4th, 2022. In this episode, we're going to talk about the investigation that occurred immediately after her shooting. This episode is going to be information heavy, but we're trying to set you up for the next handful of episodes. We're going to walk through the 911 call, the police report, the chronology report, and some conversations we have had with sources. The main thing to keep in mind is the timeline. Rachel had sublet her apartment and the tenants moved out June 1st. Rachel moved back in on June 2nd and she was murdered in the early morning hours of June 4th. One important thing to know is that we are operating with minimal information. We see very heavy redactions in the 911 call transcript, the body cam footage, and the police report itself. We've been able to identify what some of those redactions may say, so we'll review some of that with you while also discussing why certain redactions are clearly necessary. We will also walk you through one redaction that had us completely spiraling before we ended up laughing at ourselves when we realized what it actually was. We also want to remind you that although we both have specialized skills that allow us to approach these topics with a unique perspective, neither of us are journalists, investigators, reporters, detectives, or legal professionals. We're approaching this as lay people with a critical lens on the legal system through a psychological lens and an investigative lens, as people who are highly skilled at finding information. Before we get into the information more fully, we want to add a caveat. The Gilbert Police Department appears to have done a lot extremely quickly in working towards solving this case. We also consulted with an expert investigator from an outside source who indicated that this appeared to be a thorough investigation.

SPEAKER_00 2:45

I also just feel like we have to convey Ashley here because we're going to complain about redactions and we're going to complain about little things that are missing or what went wrong here. And really, we don't think necessarily those are the keys to why this case is not solved. We don't know. We're not experts. But I think that we both should share our feelings of deep respect for the people who do this work because of how all-consuming it's been for us.

SPEAKER_01 3:08

I think we both have been emotionally, physically, I'm going to use a weird word socially exhausted, like not wanting to do things or not being able to fully engage with family or friends because all I can think about is Rachel and this case. And I said to you this morning, I can't imagine this being a career. And it feels maybe more like it's a calling for people because it's really, really hard to ever turn your brain off of thinking about it.

SPEAKER_00 3:33

There's the detective trope in lots of TV shows and movies where they're like, you know, their relationships are strained and they're never home and they're barely sleeping. And I'm like, oh yeah, okay. I could totally see that if I was actually tasked with my responsibility being the person that could potentially solve this case and bring justice for this crime, how difficult it would be to stop because it's difficult to want to put it away when all I'm doing is trying to get the right information out there for the public.

SPEAKER_01 4:01

I also have a newfound respect for needing to emotionally disengage from what you're reading that are facts and what you're reading from interviews from people because it's really tempting to jump to a conclusion and then you get to the next page and realize, oh, I'm wrong, but my emotions get wrapped up in thinking I might know what's happening. So again, just having respect for people who are able to really have tunnel vision on facts.

SPEAKER_00 4:27

I know. So you're gonna hear from us as we go through, and really you're hearing a lot of just our process too. Like, here's things we know, here's everything we know. How could these things possibly fit together? And sometimes I sort of stop myself and I think, wait, why am I doing this? There is an entire set of investigators at Gilbert Police who know every detail of this and have all of the unredacted information. And obviously they're doing what they do with purpose. And then I just remind myself, but this is the only way that more pressure can get out there and more ears on it that someone might come forward with information, more media presence.

SPEAKER_01 5:03

Right. We are just trying to bring more attention to this. And like we've already said, the second we quote unquote met Rachel through Cam and other people, we fell in love with telling her story and trying to help bring justice, whatever that might look like.

SPEAKER_00 5:15

Yeah. And I think, you know, of course we want to solve the case, but not because we want to solve the case. We want somebody out there to come forward. And we're gonna say that lots of times in the next few episodes. We're gonna be like, if anybody knows who this is, please go to Gilbert Police, please go to the private investigator, Justin Yentis and his company. Please share the information that you have because that is the only way. And SilentWitness at the website, silentwitness.org, you can go do that anonymously and you can collect a$20,000 reward if it results in the snow resolution of this case. Anyway, I will say one last thing, and that is we were speaking with one of the investigators that we've consulted on this case, and they could see my full obsession with my inability to put it down. And they said, you know, at some point you're going to have to walk away. It made me cry because I'm so emotionally invested now. It just is a really hard thought. And I can't imagine being the actual investigator on this case and knowing I have to move on and solve other cases. There are more crimes and I don't have enough here. I have to let this go enough that I can keep doing my job elsewhere. That's gonna be hard. I don't have anything to add. It's gonna be hard. It's gonna be hard for us, and it just really makes me again have a really deep respect for the people who do this work. I also think about it like we've been able to really shelter ourselves. We don't we don't have to see the autopsy and take photos of the body of somebody who has been violently murdered. We don't have to be at the crime scene and see that trauma. We don't have to do all of the things that these involved folks do. So them, them living with this, you know, I somebody I spoke with some years ago who was working at the time as a prosecuting attorney said he runs a lot and he really tries to compartmentalize because it's hard to mentally go through things after you've seen some things you have to see. It's hard to just carry on. So anyway, please keep in mind our respect as we now go start our complain session.

SPEAKER_01 7:15

But I think as we're talking about how you and I have talked so much about the people doing this work and how hard that would be, I also keep in mind the people who were close to Rachel and her mom and the fact that we don't have to have those types of feelings wrapped up in this. So I wanted to tell you something that Rachel's mom said to us this morning. I was messaging some questions with her and I apologize to Kim every time I reach out to her because I just say, I bet this is really painful. And I promise I'll only come to you with questions we can't find the answers to ourselves that you might hold the key to. And you know what she said back? She said, I appreciate all you're doing. I don't mind the questions. And she said, I would rather talk about Rachel than not. Talking about her keeps her alive in my heart and my soul. I think that's why. A, we keep going and B, it's gonna be really hard to let it go.

SPEAKER_00 8:03

Let's keep Rachel in mind, as we are, for all of us, as we go through all of this evidence of what this really is. So let's dive in.

SPEAKER_01 8:11

So let's jump right into the 911 call. This audio has actually never been released to the family or the public, even though they have requested it. Cam has asked for it. She wants to hear her daughter's last words. We will also let you know that the 911 call is heavily redacted, as is the police report, which we have talked about already. So at 2.07 a.m., Rachel calls 911. The dispatcher answers and she says, I've been shot. Very quickly, dispatch attempts to find her location and they try to find her exact location around four times. There's so much time on this 911 call spent between all of the different dispatchers trying to figure out her exact unit and how to get to her. What we also know from the call is that Rachel couldn't find anything to stop the bleeding, and that she repeatedly was asked and said that she was alone in the apartment. There weren't really any questions asked about the perpetrator that we are able to see because of the redactions, other than that if he or she was still in there. We also were able to find from the chronology report, which a chronology report is just an official objective document that narrates the events of an incident and it helped us keep track of things after the end of the 911 call when the line is was remaining open and it keeps all of the events in order, that she did make it to the bathroom from her bed. So although she wasn't able to stop the bleeding, she was able to get to the bathroom. From the same chronology report, we were able to cross-reference it with the 911 call and figure out that one of the redactions indicates that Rachel did inform them that her front door was in fact unlocked. We can also see that there were potentially some questions about the number of times that she may have been shot.

SPEAKER_00 10:05

Okay, one other thing that I want to talk about with these redactions in the 911 call and in the police report. And actually, this is something that I think is really impactful to the way that we talk about things going forward through this whole case is the concept of hearsay. Hearsay is essentially something that is told outside of court by a witness. So it's not admissible in court. So it's something that someone tells you, but there's no kind of backup evidence. And the reason is you can't really verify the credibility of that source, right? So we have been told a whole lot of things by sources that would be considered hearsay in court. We are not beholden to any kind of rules around that, other than that we want to be seeking and only talking about the truth, of course. So we're not gonna say anything, we will let you know when things are hearsay or we're uncertain about the credibility, but why we feel there is some credibility there. There are some exceptions to the hearsay rule in court. And there's there's two that I think could be relevant in this case. One is, and it's not really with the 911 call, but in general in this case, something to consider is something called an excited utterance. An excited utterance is a spur of the moment, in the moment, saying something that wouldn't be thought out and then would be admissible in court because it can be more compelling. Let me tell you an example of an excited utterance. So if you remember the Casey Anthony case, Casey Anthony was a woman who was accused of killing her three-year-old daughter Kaylee quite a few years ago. The court uh case is resolved such that Casey was found not guilty of the death, but she was held responsible for some child abuse charges. Regardless of any of that piece of it, the way the case started is that Casey's daughter Kaylee was missing for about 30 days. And Casey's mother was aware of this and kept asking, like, hey, produce my grandchild, kept asking Casey, like, where is Kaylee? Where is Kaylee? And after these 30 days, Casey's mother finally called 911 and she said on the 911 call, my granddaughter's been missing, my daughter's car is here, and it smells like a dead body's been in it, or I don't know, maybe it's old pizza. And she's very upset, and that would be considered an excited utterance. So the fact that she clocked the smell of death in the car would be an excited utterance and could be admissible in court. Another exception to the rule, say the hearsay rule, is called a dying declaration. And this is directly related to the 911 call. A dying declaration, the witness is no longer going to be available to speak and they are saying something on their deathbed. These are super critical because often people will say, who did this to them? And what we don't know because of the redactions is it was there a dying declaration in this case with Rachel that she said it was this person. It's unlikely that there's a lot of information in there because we know that in throughout the police report, it says an unknown intruder. So I don't think it would say that if she had identified this person. It also, it also is unlikely because the redactions are really minimal because the text is minimal. So there's a lot of redactions, but they don't contain a ton of information clearly behind those redactions. You can tell the length of the redaction. So some of them are like, which apartment are you in? And it's redacted, but you can see that it's because the four numbers of her apartment number are underneath the black box of text. Some of the first responding officers also reported in the police report that they did try to question Rachel about things that she may know about the crime. However, they got very little information from her. She was able to give her name and her date of birth, but at the time said she didn't remember what had happened. At any rate, whatever she said, we of course want to know that. The family really wants to see it because it is her dying words and her the last words that she spoke, and those could be really critical to the case. Okay, immediately after the call was initiated, nine police units were dispatched to her apartment. So that's within about a minute and a half as soon as the 911 operator knew what was going on. Six more units were dispatched within the next 10-minute period. We know that the first couple of officers who arrived on scene found Rachel and went to her aid. And the rest of the officers, as they arrived, started securing the area. So they stood in strategic locations. And very quickly, we see from the police report and chronology report, officers that arrived after that started to canv the area to see if there were visible cameras on any of the front doors of the apartments or elsewhere in the complex, started knocking on neighbors' doors both below Rachel. Rachel was on the third floor, which is the top floor of the complex in a corner unit, and knocking on neighbors' doors around Rachel to see if anyone was available. And they did enter apartments even to see if they could find where the bullet went through the wall, if they could find where it ended up. You know, it brings up a question about the redactions. You know, given that we can see that one of the redactions is about the front door being unlocked. Like why? Why is that redacted in the in the 911 transcript? Further, it does appear with multiple of the statements, like you said, that the dispatcher is telling another dispatcher, she said she was blank. And then she said she was blank and actively bleeding. And I think that would probably say shot right or shot in the abdomen or something like that. And we know that was also publicly released by Gilbert Police Department in later posts. So it's an interesting thing. We know immediately after the incident, that same day, so she was killed in the early morning hours of June 4th. And on June 4th, later in the day, Gilbert Police Department did release a Facebook post. And we looked at that post and every comment that was still available on the post, it says June 4th, 2022, at around 2 o'clock a.m., the Gilbert Police Department received a 911 call from a female caller who advised she had been shot by an unknown person inside her apartment near Santan Village Parkway and Ray Road. Gilbert Police officers arrived on scene to find 19-year-old Rachel Hansen with a single gunshot wound. Hansen was transported to the Chandler Regional Medical Center, where she was later pronounced as deceased. Our thoughts are with Hanson's family and friends. As the investigation continues, the Gilbert Police Department is requesting anyone with information regarding the victim or incident to call the Gilbert Police Department non-emergency line or submit information through our in another communication from police on ring cameras. The Gilbert Police put on a ring neighbors app. So this is for anyone with a ring camera can get these neighbor alerts. And it said the Gilbert Police Department is looking for any video evidence in relation to a criminal incident that occurred within the Redstone at Santan Village apartment complex. We are seeking video that occurred on June 4th, 2022, between 1.30 in the morning and 3.30 in the morning of any people coming and going from this area. If you have any footage, please share it with us. So we do know the police solicited help from the public through a Facebook post and through the Ring Neighbors app. However, there was never any kind of press conference and there was never any information given about potential suspects or leads that the police had to try to get more tips on those specific areas. Thinking about what is released in the Facebook post, though, they say she had a single gunshot wound. But we just also had a realization it's possible that there were two gunshots or three, only one hit Rachel, and we just actually don't know.

SPEAKER_01 17:56

And the information that we have found in the police report and the chronology report state that they're, according to what we can see here, was one shell casing recovered.

SPEAKER_00 18:06

But here's the thing: here's our little investigative slew thing. The body camera footage shows the police going to apartments downstairs from Rachel and next door, and they are searching the wall behind the bed and the wall in the bathroom to see if any bullet has penetrated the wall. This makes me wonder if the bullet that hit Rachel remained, the casing and the bullet remained in the room where Rachel was, but there was another shot fired that they were trying to locate.

SPEAKER_01 18:40

Which means one shot hit and killed Rachel. But were there actually, was it actually more than a single gunshot? A single gunshot wound and a single gunshot are two different things.

SPEAKER_00 18:52

And just to kind of further this conversation, we had to consider could it be that they were searching for the bullet in other apartments because they didn't know yet that the bullet was located on the bed. But in the chronology report, it's only eight minutes after the first officer arrived on scene. And we know the first officer started rendering aid to Rachel. So it's eight minutes in they identified that the bullet and casing were both present on the bed. It seems unlikely to us that there was already an officer in another apartment searching the walls unless they had seen a hole in Rachel's wall, identified that maybe there was a second bullet or casing to be found. I don't know. I mean, we can't be certain on this. Again, this is just a theory that we've created and it's purely speculation, but it is something that we think is compelling. Nobody ever publicly has said that there was more than one gunshot in this case. We're proposing that maybe there were two shots fired.

SPEAKER_01 19:55

Also, because of what we've talked about with the body cam footage, we can't see. So we can't see if there was a hole in the wall. There's nothing about that information. But what we do know is that they went to talk to a downstairs neighbor and a next door neighbor.

SPEAKER_00 20:10

And you can visibly see that they are checking the wall behind the bed and on the bedroom and bathroom in one of the apartments. But at any rate, we need to consider that the language that is used around a single gunshot wound doesn't mean a single gunshot, like you said, Ashley. And that brings us to a bigger conversation here. That we need to make sure we we say there's a lot of language in the police report and in the public media that I think can be easily misconstrued. So this is one of them. She did die from a single gunshot wound. We don't know how many shots were fired. And that's something that we had to come to the realization of. Another thing is she was killed by an unknown intruder. This is regularly used language throughout this whole thing. And media, some media outlets early on at least pick this up as to be someone unknown to Rachel, but we don't actually know that. We just know it is an unknown intruder. And so being very careful about how we interpret those kinds of terms.

SPEAKER_01 21:14

So this just leaves us with more questions than answers. But what we do know is how quickly the response happened and what they found pretty much immediately after Rachel's 911 call ended. So we have talked with you a lot about how heavily redacted the police report is and the questions we have around that. And there is something in particular that we found that we were completely spinning out about in the police report. And when we finally figured it out, uh, we had to laugh at ourselves.

SPEAKER_00 21:46

In the police report, Officer Waller indicates his response to this incident. And one of the things he puts that we this is one of the things, like Ashley said, we were spinning out about. While conducting my safety sweep, I located a blank in the kitchen. Just at the entrance to the hallway to the bedroom and bathroom, based on my training and experience. And then it's redacted. As additional officers arrived on scene, I secured blank that were in the bedroom on the patio. While securing blank, I observed a and then a long redaction. So Ashley and I spent a lot of time like, what kind of evidence is this that needed to be secured right away? Is this a firearm? Could this be something like drug paraphernalia, maybe from the previous tenants or from Rachel? I we don't know, right? But what could this be? Is this an electronic device of some kind? But we did figure it out.

SPEAKER_01 22:40

And I'll I'll continue by saying then later in the police report, when they go to speak with Todd Hansen, Rachel's dad, this comes up again and they ask Todd, would you like to go get this item that was on her balcony? And we thought, what is so important that he needs to go and get from her house that they then bring to him? This seemed like a very important piece of whatever it was. And then we figured out what it was. And we are happy that they took care of it because it was Rachel's dogs.

SPEAKER_00 23:08

The dogs. Why is that redacted? I'm unclear. I guess, you know, protection from media scrutiny for the dogs. We did have to be like, okay, this is the thing, is sometimes we run down these rabbit holes and we spend a lot of time thinking about something, and then it's the dogs.

SPEAKER_01 23:25

It also, though, continues our conversation about why are some things redacted and some things not, because certainly this is something we spent time on. We didn't need to spend so much time on.

SPEAKER_00 23:35

I know. Who knows? And and this again, you know, calls into question like what were the decisions that were made and why were they made. And it's funny because some of these things I think we've dismissed. Like, that's why would they redact that? That's unimportant. And then then we come around to like, oh, well, maybe there's more information there than we thought. Right.

SPEAKER_01 23:53

And knowing our audience and our community, we're glad that the dogs are okay.

SPEAKER_00 23:59

We also know that within the minutes after the 911 call, dispatchers started pulling history from both the apartment and from Rachel herself. And they assigned an officer to actually do some intel and some research on Rachel and try to find ties to her. One of the first history items they identified was remember how we told you Rachel had been living elsewhere and had just moved back into the apartment. They found some history from property management's reports about lots of men coming and going from the apartment and the smell of marijuana. In the police report, it is noted by one of the responding officers that the apartment smelled strongly of marijuana on this night as well. But we don't know the source of that marijuana, if that was from Rachel's personal use, from the intruder, or from the previous tenants. And because it had been such a pervasive smell for so long, if that was just a lingering scent.

SPEAKER_01 24:58

We can also see that at 2:17 a.m., so just 10 minutes after she made the 911 call, that they're able to locate and see that Rachel had previously called on April 27th, 2022. So what five, five-ish weeks before this, that her fiance's dad texted her and said, if I ever see you in my house again, I will shoot you in the head.

SPEAKER_00 25:23

More to come on both of those histories and our next episodes. This really led police very quickly to two of their top three leads that they initially ran down in this case. So we are going to do subsequent episodes where we cover in detail those different leads. But for now, what we know happened next is after Rachel was transported to Chandler Regional Medical Hospital, there were still things going on with the investigation. In those hours, we had a crime scene specialist arrived to take photographs and reportedly took 330 crime scene photographs and photographs of the apartment and garage. These 330 photos have never been released publicly in any form, redacted or otherwise. Kim and Todd Hansen have never seen these photos. So these photos have been kept very private. Do you know some about evidence items that you might have interest in? First of these is related to her time at the hospital. So two officers were sent to follow Rachel to the hospital and to stay outside the room where she was being operated on for those three hours. After Rachel succumbed to her injuries, officers went in to photograph Rachel's body and make sure that they had all of the evidence collected that they needed. They asked hospital personnel for Rachel's clothing from when she came in, and hospital personnel told the officers that anything that Rachel had come into the hospital with had been bagged and disposed of already. Ashley, is this this seems like I don't know who dropped the ball here. Sounds like if somebody comes in with a gunshot wound, the hospital should preserve those items.

SPEAKER_01 27:03

But I cannot imagine if someone comes in and passes away getting rid of what I would see as evidence. That said, we also learned from our conversation with Kim, Rachel's mom, that when the apartment was released to them, which was on the 6th, and they went to the apartment, it had not been cleaned in any way, shape, or form. The apartment had been left exactly as it was when Rachel was transported to the hospital. Kim reported to us seeing a pair of what Kim said in our call, sorts that she might sleep in, were on the ground of her apartment. So Kim questioned what she was transported into the hospital, was that actually what she had on? Or is there a chance that the item of clothing that Kim saw on the ground in Rachel's apartment is in fact what she was wearing at the time that she was shot?

SPEAKER_00 27:54

Just to just to add to the part where you said, you know, no one had really had cleaned the apartment when it was released to them, that was something that Kim and Todd were really unaware was going to happen. I mean, and there was really no victim advocacy available to them. I mean, nobody reached out. Um, they did have one phone call where someone basically said, if you're having trouble meeting your basic needs, we can help you get food stamps. And Kim was like, that's not really our concern right now. Um, but nobody warned them about getting a cleaning service or offered any of those kinds of resources. So what a traumatic thing to walk in on.

SPEAKER_01 28:28

Horribly traumatic. And I guess when it when we have questions about what she was or was not wearing, in the chronology report, they use the language chest sucking, right? So that implies something is on her chest, which would uh also imply, I believe, that her top would have had to at least have been moved if not taken all the way off. But whatever she the I I think the thing we know to be true is that whatever she arrived in to the hospital, she had on clothes of some sort because it's in the report that the clothes were put into the trash. What we don't know yet is if those were the clothes that she was shot in or if they were not.

SPEAKER_00 29:13

We do know the clothes were never recovered. Um, yeah, and you know, just looking up some basic information on a sucking chest wound, it is basically when there is an opening in the chest and hissing or sucking sounds when the person inhales or exhales, heavy bleeding, foaming or bright blood around the wound, and coughing up blood. So this is a specific type of injury. Kim did tell us that she was informed by the surgeon that 92% of people who receive that injury pass they are fatal injuries. They did hope because of Rachel's youth and health that she would be able to beat those odds and survive. But unfortunately, she did not.

SPEAKER_01 29:53

So, Emma, as you already said, we don't know what she arrived to the hospital in. We're not sure what the clothes on the floor of her apartment were. But what we do know is that whatever she arrived to the hospital in is now gone. It has been put in the trash. So if there was anything of evidentiary value on her clothing, we will quite literally never know.

SPEAKER_00 30:16

Regardless of who dropped the ball or how this happened with the clothing at the hospital, we do know that collecting clothing in a homicide would be like first-line evidence. So the expectation would have been that the police had already collected this at the location of the crime. So at Rachel's apartment, we would have expected that they took the clothing there and placed it into evidence bags. It does beg the question of how did the clothing get missed and not even wasn't then requested until after she had passed three hours later at the hospital.

SPEAKER_01 30:51

One of the issues with the clothes being thrown away is that the there's potential that the clothes could have gunshot residue scattered on the clothing near the entrance wound, which could give us some information about proximity to the shooter, or the clothes could have had some types of other DNA on them, but we will never know because they were thrown away. Okay, back to evidence. A total of 24 items of evidence were collected. We don't know what most of those are because they are redacted, but we can tell you about some of them. So one of the first things we were able to identify is that they did send two items to the county of Cumberland, Pennsylvania, forensic labs. These two items were sent to try and find latent prints utilizing technology more advanced than what they had in Gilbert, Arizona. Unfortunately, the evidence was placed back into custody of the Gilbert Police property custodian, and they were unable to obtain any evidence from the submitted items.

SPEAKER_00 31:46

We also know that officers created what's called a pharaoh, which is a 3D rendering of the room of the crime scene so that they can continue to take measurements and look at all potential evidence long-term.

SPEAKER_01 31:58

The police report also shows us that two firearms were put into evidence. We know one firearm was Rachel's firearm, and that was retrieved on July 28th and placed into evidence. The other firearm was sent to evidence on June 6th and is listed in the table of contents as stolen. So that's just two days after her death. Well, and we have no idea who the firearm belongs to. Right. We know from the police report that they found an Izzy bottle and a truly can and swabbed those for DNA. But according to the police report, no meaningful conclusions could be made about them because they both had insufficient DNA. We know that this also happened with swabs from the exterior and interior bedroom door handles, that there was insufficient DNA. And we also know from the interior door handle and exterior door handle of the front door that there was insufficient DNA. We also know that there was something found at the scene that they labeled as a cartridge.

SPEAKER_00 32:59

The cartridge thing is interesting. You know, we tried to look up what kind of cartridge, and obviously our brains went to like a gun cartridge, which is fully intact. So like an unspent round, right? So did they find an unspent round on the property? And we do know that Rachel owned a gun. So it's possible that was hers. Also, we know that Jomette was very into guns, and so it could have been one of his as well. So, or it could have been there from the previous tenant. So we don't know what that was. Also, the word cartridge, we were like, huh, looked it up. Could be printer cartridge, a game console cartridge. We have no idea. But I think the interesting thing about this one is that a cartridge was collected, swabs were taken to test for DNA, and there's no outcome report that we can see. It could be something that's redacted in the police report or it's not present.

SPEAKER_01 33:45

We also know from the police report that DNA swabs were taken from Rachel, and it appears that DNA was taken from at least one other individual, but we are unable to see who that is or what any findings were.

SPEAKER_00 33:58

In the morning hours, Jomette was interviewed by police for the first time on June 4th. So we know that they spoke with him pretty quickly that day, and he was able to give some information for them to continue their search. One piece of evidence that we assume Jamette indicated was not from them was an in-and-out receipt. The police officer who went to the hospital and was at the hospital with Rachel, they were waiting on a search warrant. They needed a search warrant, I guess, to search her apartment or process her apartment to fully process it. So while they waited for that and he was at the hospital, he was then assigned, after he was finished there of collecting photographic evidence, this crime scene specialist, to go follow up on this in and out receipt. This receipt was for the in and out on 2449 South Market Street in Gilbert, Arizona. It's only one mile from Rachel's apartment. They went at about seven in the morning to try to follow up on this receipt. The employee came to the door and the police said what they were looking for. They were informed that a manager with video surveillance access would be available at about 7:45 a.m. Follow-up investigation was later conducted by a different detective, and that detective provides some sort of follow-up with that receipt at In N Out, but we don't know the outcome of that either. We will continue to bring you evidence from the investigation as we go through the rest of this case. But here's what you can expect from our next episodes. We know that police ran down some leads immediately. In fact, even very early in the morning at seven in the morning, we know that units were dispatched to an address to try to start investigating a lead. We know that people were brought in in the subsequent days. And what we can tell you is a lot about what was happening with Rachel in the days just prior to her death. If we look at about the six weeks before Rachel died, we can see three primary theories of what may have been involved in this, and we are gonna run you through those in the next episodes. Stay tuned. We will be bringing you information about the horse business that Rachel was in and about a night intruder in the day before Rachel's death. Thank you for listening. If you have any tips on the Rachel Hansen case, please call the Gilbert, Arizona Police Department or head to silentwitness.org to submit your tip. Visit our Patreon at the Creepy Book Club for early release, ad free, extra episodes, and behind the scenes content. Music by Craig Reaver. Editing, production, research, and writing by the Creepy Book Club.