Speaker 1: I'm floating in water, naked. Salt burns my eyes, but
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter. There of no use. Everything is black.
Speaker 1: I hold my hand an inch from my face, but
Speaker 1: I can't see my fingers. Total silence. I'm in an
Speaker 1: isolation tank. Picture a big horizontal egg, half filled with water.
Speaker 1: You climb in, pull down the hatch, seal yourself in,
Speaker 1: and float. The idea is to eliminate sensory overload, relieve anxiety,
Speaker 1: boost creativity, focus, or conversely go blank. I don't zen out, though,
Speaker 1: I think about this story, about how the missing men
Speaker 1: likely crashed into water and drowned, About the violence of
Speaker 1: nature and the brutality of loss, About my burning eyes.
Speaker 1: From my heart Media, This is Missing in Alaska, the
Speaker 1: story of two congressmen who vanished in nineteen two, and
Speaker 1: my quest to figure out what happened to them. I'm
Speaker 1: your host, John Wallzac. Full disclosure, This was supposed to
Speaker 1: be our final episode, but we're getting so many new
Speaker 1: leads that we'll likely be back in the future with updates.
Speaker 1: For now, though, let me examine sixteen critical questions about
Speaker 1: the disappearance and give you some unexpected answers. You'll hear
Speaker 1: it back and forth between me and Paul Deckett are
Speaker 1: supervising producer one. Is it really so bizarre for a
Speaker 1: small plane to disappear in Alaska and never be found. Yes,
Speaker 1: of course planes do vanish in Alaska without a trace,
Speaker 1: but it's not the norm. In nineteen two, Air Force
Speaker 1: Major Henry Stocker, the search commander, told reporters, quote, of
Speaker 1: what we're looking for, we locate. Of the previous twelve
Speaker 1: hundred planes to disappear, one official said only three had
Speaker 1: never been found. An Air Force document I obtained says, quote,
Speaker 1: had the aircraft or its occupants have been able to
Speaker 1: send an electronic signal, the probability of detection of this
Speaker 1: signal was. The probability of detection of fires or other
Speaker 1: visual signals from survivors was the probability of detection of
Speaker 1: the aircraft if intact in the search area was an
Speaker 1: excess of nine. The probability of locating aircraft, wreckage or
Speaker 1: survivors without fires or signaling devices was an excess of
Speaker 1: in all search areas, and an excess of in the
Speaker 1: highest probability area end quote. So, according to the Air Force,
Speaker 1: there was a chance of finding wreckage in the highest
Speaker 1: probability surge area, but still nothing, no debris, no oil
Speaker 1: slick nothing from the plane. And even when planes do disappear,
Speaker 1: they're often located years or decades later. Take the case
Speaker 1: of Clearance Road, a U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Speaker 1: official who vanished on a small plane in Alaska in
Speaker 1: nineteen fifty. Despite a hundred and forty seven thousand square
Speaker 1: miles search, his plane was never found either until nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy nine, when hikers stumbled upon it in a remote
Speaker 1: part of the Brooks Range, high above the Arctic Circle two.
Speaker 1: Where did the plane crash, probably into Prince William Sound,
Speaker 1: somewhere between Portage Pass and Henson Brook Island. The last
Speaker 1: time anyone heard from the plane was right before it
Speaker 1: entered the pass, but searchers found no wreckage in the past,
Speaker 1: nor has any sign of it surfaced there in the
Speaker 1: last fifty years. We also have a critical clue. Around
Speaker 1: am on the morning of October six, nineteen seventy two,
Speaker 1: at least one to three people described in various accounts
Speaker 1: as a dock worker, construction worker, and or fisherman, heard
Speaker 1: a small plane fly over Whittier, The only plane in
Speaker 1: the vicinity of Whittier at that time was the baggage
Speaker 1: Boggs plane, so it seems that the missing plane did
Speaker 1: make it through Portage Pass over Whittier and onto Prince
Speaker 1: William Sound. At that point, it would have been about
Speaker 1: seventy five miles from Johnstone Point on the northern tip
Speaker 1: of Hension Brook Island. At Johnstone there was a radio
Speaker 1: relay that would have allowed the pilot, Don John's to
Speaker 1: speak with the flight service specialist in Anchorage, but Don
Speaker 1: never radioed in after crossing through Portage Pass. Why. There
Speaker 1: are a few possible explanations. Don's radio broke at that
Speaker 1: very moment, right after he crossed through Portage Pass, but
Speaker 1: before he was within range of Johnstone. Verdict possible, but
Speaker 1: very unlikely. Since Dawn wasn't required to make contact at Johnstone,
Speaker 1: he chose not to, so he actually made it past
Speaker 1: Hinsion Brook without checking in. But Don was known to
Speaker 1: radio in three to four times when flying between Anchorage
Speaker 1: and Juno, and he probably would have wanted to check
Speaker 1: in to see if there were any new weather updates.
Speaker 1: Verdict possible but unlikely. Don crashed right after he got
Speaker 1: through Portage Pass, but before he was within range of Johnstone.
Speaker 1: This would have had to occur during a narrow window
Speaker 1: of time, though, say five to fifteen minutes, because once
Speaker 1: he got through the pass he would have been within
Speaker 1: range of the radio relay pretty quickly. Verdict possible, but
Speaker 1: less likely. Don had a sudden emergency while he was
Speaker 1: within range of Johnstone and then crashed. In this case,
Speaker 1: even if he could radio in, he would have been
Speaker 1: preoccupied with saving the plane. Verdict possible. On this note,
Speaker 1: there's also a chance Don was within range of Johnstone
Speaker 1: but too low to make contact. Maybe there was an
Speaker 1: emergency and he wanted to call in, but he couldn't.
Speaker 1: His radio was line of sight, so terrain like mountains
Speaker 1: could have blocked a transmission. Verdict possible. Some people speculate
Speaker 1: that Don did not cross through Portage Pass. They think
Speaker 1: he took an alternate route without notifying the authorities. Maybe
Speaker 1: he followed a rail line down to seward, crossed over water,
Speaker 1: and then disappeared. But this doesn't take into account witness
Speaker 1: reports of a plane crossing over Whittier that morning. Verdict possible,
Speaker 1: but very unlike so to recap based on available evidence,
Speaker 1: it's still most likely that the plane craft somewhere between
Speaker 1: Portage Pass and Henshon Brook Island, probably into Prince William Sound.
Speaker 1: Three was the Cessina tail Bob Martinson found around right
Speaker 1: off Henshon Brook Island, part of the Beggage Bogg's plane.
Speaker 1: Maybe the coloration, size and tail number all apparently match,
Speaker 1: so does the location. Poor Duchess is only about ten
Speaker 1: miles south of V three one seven, the route Don
Speaker 1: John's planned to take on October six ninety two. That day,
Speaker 1: if Don flew low under a cloud ceiling, he would
Speaker 1: have had to circle around Hension Brook, not over it
Speaker 1: by heading north or south. If he flew south trying
Speaker 1: to circle around the island, and if he had an emergency,
Speaker 1: he would have likely turned east into port Us instead
Speaker 1: of heading out over open ocean. Once in port Ches,
Speaker 1: he likely would have tried to cross through a low
Speaker 1: pass of about a thousand feet and then attempted to
Speaker 1: land either somewhere on Hension Book or in Cordova. Four.
Speaker 1: What happened to the tailpiece Bob found Bob is fuzzy
Speaker 1: on whether he, his father and only Resa there fishing
Speaker 1: partner left the tail in the water, if they brought
Speaker 1: it back to Cordova, or if they sent it back
Speaker 1: on a tender, a type of supply boat. Bob thinks
Speaker 1: they sent it back to Cordova on a tender. Five.
Speaker 1: If it made it back to Cordova to the Alaska
Speaker 1: State troopers, what happened, then where is it? Honestly, I
Speaker 1: have no idea. I tried to track down troopers who
Speaker 1: were stationed in Cordova around nineteen to ask them, because
Speaker 1: even if they determined that it belonged to a different plane,
Speaker 1: that's not the type of thing you forget. There should
Speaker 1: be documentation of which plane it belonged to. Unfortunately, the
Speaker 1: only troopers I could find have died six What happened
Speaker 1: to the plane on October sixteenth? Why did it crash again?
Speaker 1: There are multiple possible explanations, including a mechanical failure, be
Speaker 1: whether see pilot error or d a bomb or some
Speaker 1: other black swan event. I don't buy option a catastrophic
Speaker 1: mechanical failure. The plane had just undergone a hundred hour
Speaker 1: inspection the day before it disappeared, and then that night
Speaker 1: Dawn flew it safely from Fairbanks to Anchorage. I know
Speaker 1: at this very moment some pilots are squirming in their seats,
Speaker 1: so let me explain to the general public what these
Speaker 1: pilots have explained to me. The odds of a small
Speaker 1: plane suffering a mechanical failure actually go up after a
Speaker 1: through inspection because everything gets jostled around, etcetera. But the
Speaker 1: higher odds are still extremely low. So option B, whether
Speaker 1: this is what most people believe brought down the plane, specifically,
Speaker 1: ice turbulence seems less likely. It would have been most
Speaker 1: severe in portage pass, but the plane apparently made it
Speaker 1: through the pass through the worst of it, So again ice.
Speaker 1: To be clear, there's zero doubt that icing conditions were
Speaker 1: present that day. The weather was undeniably bad. But it's
Speaker 1: important to explain a few things first. When you think
Speaker 1: of a small plane icing up and crashing, what do
Speaker 1: you picture? Do you see it freezing into an ice
Speaker 1: cube and just falling out of the sky, Because if so,
Speaker 1: that's not how it works. The real reason ice is
Speaker 1: so dangerous, as Don himself pointed out in his article
Speaker 1: Ice Without Fear, which ran the same month he disappeared,
Speaker 1: is not the weight it adds. It's because ice can
Speaker 1: interfere with airflow, making it hard, if not impossible, for
Speaker 1: small planes to climb. So you risk losing altitude, stalling
Speaker 1: and then eventually crashing. Second, why does nearly everyone believe
Speaker 1: ice brought down the missing plane? There are two important
Speaker 1: reasons here. No wreckage was ever found, so zero evidence
Speaker 1: that everyone wants some explanation. And that brings me to
Speaker 1: Don John's the pilot. He's an easy scapegoat. In Ice
Speaker 1: Without Fear, which again was on news stands when the
Speaker 1: plane disappeared, Don made several inflammatory comments, including quote, playing
Speaker 1: with ice is like playing with the devil. Fun but
Speaker 1: don't play unless you can cheat. But that's only a
Speaker 1: single line. Read the whole article. Don was wicked, smart,
Speaker 1: and a damn good pilot. He survived more than seventeen
Speaker 1: thousand hours flying and often brutal Arctic conditions. Yes, he
Speaker 1: was arrogant, but there's a difference between arrogance born of
Speaker 1: inexperienced youth and arrogance born of actually being good at
Speaker 1: what you do. Now, grizzled pilots like to say there
Speaker 1: are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old bold pilots,
Speaker 1: And there's some truth to that. If you take risks,
Speaker 1: your odds of dying obviously go up to these old Timers.
Speaker 1: Don is a very polarizing figure. They see him as
Speaker 1: either a genius or a fool. And this polarization is
Speaker 1: very important because when you can bind bad weather and
Speaker 1: Don's article, conditions were right for Don to take the
Speaker 1: fall for the cocky pilot who iced up and crashed
Speaker 1: narrative to dominate, even though since no wreckage was ever found,
Speaker 1: that theory, too, is based entirely on speculation. Furthermore, while
Speaker 1: evaluating the ice theory, let's take a closer look at
Speaker 1: weather conditions that a by Alaska standards, they were actually
Speaker 1: pretty mild. The surface temperature along much of the plane's
Speaker 1: route was in the forties, well above freezing, and in
Speaker 1: the air the freezing level was at about five to
Speaker 1: six thousand feet. What does this tell us For argument's sake,
Speaker 1: Let's say Don did encounter moderate to severe icing conditions. First,
Speaker 1: as an experienced pilot, he would have known quickly that
Speaker 1: he was in trouble. Second, it's extremely unlikely, almost impossible,
Speaker 1: that ice could have built up so quickly that it
Speaker 1: caused the plane to suddenly plummet into the sea. If
Speaker 1: Don was flying high enough and to accumulate a significant
Speaker 1: amount of ice, that day he would have had to
Speaker 1: have been he would have had time to descend into
Speaker 1: warmer air. And even if he iced up while crossing
Speaker 1: through Portage Pass, he still had seventy five miles ago
Speaker 1: before reaching hnsin Brooke. He would have been over open
Speaker 1: water most of the time. He had time to escape
Speaker 1: into warmer air, and he had room. Now, let's look
Speaker 1: at the plane itself, a twin engine Cessna three ten.
Speaker 1: See the three ten is not intended to find icing
Speaker 1: conditions for any extended period of time, no matter what. Regardless,
Speaker 1: just because the three ten encounters icing conditions doesn't mean
Speaker 1: it will automatically crash. So other than pilot experience, the
Speaker 1: vital question is what kind of icing equipment did the
Speaker 1: plane have. First, you have to delineate between anti ice
Speaker 1: equipment and d ice equipment. Anti ice equipment helps prevent
Speaker 1: ice build up, d ice equipment helps remove it. According
Speaker 1: to the NTSB's final accident report, the missing plane had
Speaker 1: only a single piece of icing equipment, a heated pet tube,
Speaker 1: which is a device that prevents ice from interfering with
Speaker 1: air speed measurements. Past that, the NTSB report states explicitly
Speaker 1: that the plane had no other anti I equipment, and
Speaker 1: it makes no mention of any d ice equipment either.
Speaker 1: Since ice is most often cited as the reason the
Speaker 1: plane crashed, this is extremely important. Now listen closely to
Speaker 1: what I'm about to tell you, because to my knowledge,
Speaker 1: nobody has ever reported it until now. There appeared to
Speaker 1: be major errors in the NTSB report discrepancies and omissions.
Speaker 1: Before I go on, let me credit Mike Travis, a
Speaker 1: pilot based in Washington State who has extensive experience flying
Speaker 1: in Alaska, as the first person to notice this. Mike
Speaker 1: and I both obtained the missing planes airworthiness records from
Speaker 1: the f a A. Mike also obtained copies of the
Speaker 1: plane's original records from Cessna. In these records, we found
Speaker 1: something fascinating. It appears that the missing plane was outfitted
Speaker 1: with three pieces of anti ice and d ice equipment
Speaker 1: that we're not mentioned in the NTSB accident report. This
Speaker 1: is a huge deal. Specifically, Mike and I found documentation
Speaker 1: that the plane had one pneumatic d ice boots on
Speaker 1: both its wings and horizontal stabilizer part of its tail.
Speaker 1: Pilots inflate d ice boots to crack ice off a
Speaker 1: plane's airframe and allow wind to carry it away. Two
Speaker 1: an alcohol based anti ice propeller system which pumps anti
Speaker 1: ice fluid onto propeller blades, and three a d ice light.
Speaker 1: According to Andrew Kalett, a Georgia based pilot who co
Speaker 1: hosts the defense security podcast, d ice lights let you
Speaker 1: light up the leading edge of wings at night to
Speaker 1: see if you're picking up ice. So why did the
Speaker 1: NTSB mentioned none of this? How did the NTSB missed
Speaker 1: three pieces of anti ice and d ice equipment on
Speaker 1: a plane presumed have been felled by ice. The most
Speaker 1: generous explanation is gross negligence that d NTSB just missed
Speaker 1: the equipment. It beyond that, it's possible that the icing
Speaker 1: equipment was removed sometime before the plane disappeared, but if
Speaker 1: it was removed, that should have been documented. Finally, it's
Speaker 1: possible that the icing equipment was there but it didn't work.
Speaker 1: It was inoperative, so the NTSB just didn't mention it.
Speaker 1: But the NTSB did mention a different system on the
Speaker 1: plane that was functional but inoperative, an oxygen system that
Speaker 1: worked but had not been serviced with oxygen. So even
Speaker 1: if the plane had an operative icing equipment, the NTSB
Speaker 1: should have mentioned it, as it did with the oxygen system.
Speaker 1: For clarification, I called Phil Hewith, the mechanic who worked
Speaker 1: on the missing plane the day before it disappeared. Phil
Speaker 1: remembers that at the very least, the plane did have
Speaker 1: functioning d ice boots, meaning not only were they not removed,
Speaker 1: but they worked to recap According to FAA records, CESSNA records,
Speaker 1: and Phil Hewith, the missing plane apparently had three pieces
Speaker 1: of icing equipment not included in the NTSB accident report.
Speaker 1: Why did the NTSB exclude this equipment, I don't know,
Speaker 1: but by not including it, the NTSB helped further the
Speaker 1: iced up and crashed narrative, the narrative that most people
Speaker 1: to this day still believe. Now. The fact that the
Speaker 1: plane had this extra equipment does not mean it's impossible
Speaker 1: that it iceed up and crashed. It means it's less
Speaker 1: likely the extra equipment should have bought Don John's, the pilot,
Speaker 1: at least an additional five to ten minutes to escape
Speaker 1: into better conditions and or warmer air. All together, when
Speaker 1: you combine Don's experience, mild temperatures, and extra unreported icing
Speaker 1: equipment not cited by the NTSB, the ice up and
Speaker 1: crash theory seems much less likely today than at any
Speaker 1: point in the last fifty years. So I've examined two
Speaker 1: possible explanations for why the plane crashed, mechanical failure and weather.
Speaker 1: What about the others options? See? Is pilot error? Now,
Speaker 1: Dawn was very smart and very experienced, but that doesn't
Speaker 1: rule out pilot error. It just means it's less likely.
Speaker 1: For argument's sake, let's say pilot error did play a
Speaker 1: role here. There are many possible scenarios, and we can't
Speaker 1: examine them all but one, perhaps the likeliest, is that
Speaker 1: Dawn flew too low and slammed into a mountain or glacier.
Speaker 1: But this doesn't make sense. Remember when US has heard
Speaker 1: a plane, probably this plane pass over Whittier, and beyond
Speaker 1: Whittier it's mostly open water until hension brooke. That leaves
Speaker 1: us with option D, the black Swan event, a bomb
Speaker 1: or something else unexpected and extreme. Seven. Was the plane bombed?
Speaker 1: I don't know. Eight? Could the plane have been bombed? Yes,
Speaker 1: how maybe with the bomb triggered by a barometric pressure
Speaker 1: or a timer or a radio receiver. The possibilities are endless.
Speaker 1: Where would you hide it? Probably in the tail compartment.
Speaker 1: Why would anyone bomb it? Well, that gets the motive
Speaker 1: that gets to Jerry Paisley and his claims. Nine do
Speaker 1: you think Jerry Paisley lied? I think there's a strong
Speaker 1: possibility that he did tell the truth, at least in part.
Speaker 1: And I'm not alone in that opinion. The three members
Speaker 1: of law enforcement and the NBC producer who interviewed him
Speaker 1: all agree with me. Look, if I thought everything Paisley
Speaker 1: said was bullshit, I would tell you. I'm not here
Speaker 1: to lie to you. I'm here to tell the truth
Speaker 1: to the best of my ability. I've tried to keep
Speaker 1: speculation to a minimum. I want you to make up
Speaker 1: your own mind. But come on, you mean to tell
Speaker 1: me that one year after congressman vanished, by pure coincidence,
Speaker 1: his widows stumbled into a mobster, married him. And by
Speaker 1: the way, this guy murdered five or six people, bombed
Speaker 1: a judge's house, and had close ties to two prominent
Speaker 1: mafia families. For argument's sake, okay, chalk it up to coincidence.
Speaker 1: Twenty years after this coincidence, this guy, Jerry Paisley, tells
Speaker 1: law enforcement a shocking story. He claims that Peggy Begett
Speaker 1: met with mob boss Joe Bonano in Tucson in the
Speaker 1: summer of nineteen seventy two, right before her husband, Congressman
Speaker 1: Nick Beggett, disappeared. He claims that shortly thereafter, a Banano
Speaker 1: lieutenant named Joe I Trolla or Joey the I asked
Speaker 1: him to fly a suitcase to Anchorage. He claims he
Speaker 1: did fly a suitcase to Anchorage. He claims that two men,
Speaker 1: Danny Zivanich and Jean Fowler, picked him up at the
Speaker 1: Anchorage airport, and that later that night the three of
Speaker 1: them met up with Jean's brother Larry. He claims that
Speaker 1: after he, Peggy and Zivinich went into business in nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy four, Zivinas told him that Peggy owed him because
Speaker 1: he quote blew her old man out of the sky. Now,
Speaker 1: what of Paisley's story? Can we prove? Paisley did marry
Speaker 1: Peggy Baggage. Paisley and Peggy did go into business with Zivinage.
Speaker 1: Paisley did have close ties to to mob families, the
Speaker 1: Bananas and the Lick of Olie's. Paisley did murder people
Speaker 1: and conduct bombings. The rest I'm not a hundred percent sure,
Speaker 1: but if Paisley's claims are true, if I'd speculate the
Speaker 1: following things. One, Jean and Larry four were bit players.
Speaker 1: Jeane was paid to pick up Paisley at the airport
Speaker 1: and not ask questions, and the three men just hung
Speaker 1: out that night with Larry. Two Joeyah Tarrola was also
Speaker 1: a bit player. He ran an errand for his boss. Three.
Speaker 1: Paisley knew more than he led on, but he was
Speaker 1: still mostly a bit player. Four. As for Danny Zivinag,
Speaker 1: he's a cipher. I don't know much about him. He
Speaker 1: was in the military, moved to Alaska and was a bartender.
Speaker 1: Next thing you know, he owns fifty of Max Inc.
Speaker 1: The company he started with Peggy and Paisley. Five. The
Speaker 1: Mob would have gotten involved for one of two reasons. First,
Speaker 1: there's always a direct payment. Give us money, We'll give
Speaker 1: you a bomb. Second, and I think this is more
Speaker 1: likely if Peggy won nick seat and she did run
Speaker 1: for it, the mob would have had Alaska's only congress
Speaker 1: person in its back pocket. During a gold rush time,
Speaker 1: the oil boom, when there were moves and money to
Speaker 1: be made. You could ask well, why go through all
Speaker 1: that trouble? Why not bribe or blackmail Nick Baggage instead?
Speaker 1: And my answer would be that every single person I've interviewed,
Speaker 1: and I mean every person, said Nick was clean and
Speaker 1: a man of integrity. I don't think he could be
Speaker 1: bought off or blackmailed. Six If the plane was bombed,
Speaker 1: why do it with hail bogs on board? To that,
Speaker 1: I'd say, if someone bombed the plane, they would have
Speaker 1: had the factor in the likelihood that wreckage would be
Speaker 1: found and a bomb identified as the cause of the crash.
Speaker 1: And then who would everyone pinpoint as the target, the
Speaker 1: nerdy first term congressman from Alaska or the House Majority
Speaker 1: leader who served on the Warrant Commission seven? Why would
Speaker 1: Peggy get involved? Though her son Tom denies it, multiple
Speaker 1: people told me that Peggy's marriage to Nick was strained,
Speaker 1: that they were separated and considering a divorce. Peggy met
Speaker 1: Nick in Minnesota when Nick was a young twenties something
Speaker 1: high school teacher, her high school teacher. They got married,
Speaker 1: moved to Alaska, had six kids, and then Nick was
Speaker 1: gone most of the time. Working documents show that Peggy
Speaker 1: got about a million dollars in today's dollars after Nick disappeared. Eight.
Speaker 1: Even if Paisley told the truth, it's possible Peggy did
Speaker 1: not know what she was getting herself into. She could
Speaker 1: have been manipulated and used. Nine. Paisley might have told
Speaker 1: the truth in part. It might not be so simple
Speaker 1: as he lied or he told the truth. Maybe he
Speaker 1: told part of the truth. And this leads me to
Speaker 1: an interesting theory. When I sat down with Tom Davis,
Speaker 1: the Arizona investigator who observed Paisley's wedding to Peggy in
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy four and interviewed Paisley in he pointed out
Speaker 1: something interesting in the red dot photos, the Peggy Paisley
Speaker 1: wedding photos. Every person connected to organized crime is tie
Speaker 1: primarily to the lick of OLiS, not the bananas. Heck,
Speaker 1: even Pete Lackavoli Jr. Himself is there, but none of
Speaker 1: the bananas. In addition, the Conti Qui, where Paisley claimed
Speaker 1: Peggy met with Joe Bonano, was owned, at least in part,
Speaker 1: not by the bananas but by the lick of OLiS.
Speaker 1: Also in nineteen seventy four, Joeya Tarola or Joey the I,
Speaker 1: the man who allegedly gave Paisley the suitcase filled with explosives,
Speaker 1: was secretly photographed at a Tucson golf tournament with two
Speaker 1: of Paisley's friends, Sal Spinelli and Pete Likavoli Jr. Finally,
Speaker 1: in FBI records, I found something very interesting. An FBI
Speaker 1: memo dated October six, nineteen seventy two, only ten days
Speaker 1: before the congressman disappeared, states that Jerry Paisley was spotted
Speaker 1: in September nineteen seventy two, around the same time he
Speaker 1: claimed to have transported explosives to Anchorage with Pete Likavoli Sr.
Speaker 1: The Big Boss. Here's part of the memo with the
Speaker 1: word blank substituted in for redacted sections. Quote source advised
Speaker 1: that on nine, nineteen seventy two, Jerry Max Paisley and
Speaker 1: Pete Lookavoli Senior had been in the Hilton Inn bar together.
Speaker 1: During the time they were in the bar, they blank.
Speaker 1: Source stated that she had heard that Paisley was presently
Speaker 1: residing at the Hilton Inn motel. End quote. And there's
Speaker 1: a second FBI memo quote On September twenty one, nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy two, p x T DASH two advised that on Blank,
Speaker 1: Jerry Max Paisley and Pete Lookavoli Senor had been in
Speaker 1: the Hilton Inn bar together. During the time that they
Speaker 1: were in the bar together, they were also joined by blank.
Speaker 1: Source stated he had heard that Paisley was presently residing
Speaker 1: at the Hilton Inn motel end quote. So, per two
Speaker 1: FBI memos, Jerry Paisley was observed with Pete Lackavoli year
Speaker 1: in Tucsson on September nineteenth, nineteen seventy two, only twenty
Speaker 1: seven days before the congressman disappeared again. Paisley claimed that
Speaker 1: Peggy Beggett visited Tusson sometime around August nineteen seventy two,
Speaker 1: and that about two weeks later he transported a lock
Speaker 1: suitcase with explosives to Anchorage. So why would Paisley blame
Speaker 1: the bananas instead of the lick of OLiS. I don't know.
Speaker 1: Maybe he wanted to protect them, Maybe he wanted to
Speaker 1: protect himself by changing key details. At this point, let
Speaker 1: me pause because I need to correct an error I
Speaker 1: made in two previous episodes. In episodes four and eight,
Speaker 1: I stated that Peggy Beggett and Jerry Paisley were accompanied
Speaker 1: on their honeymoon to Mexico in nineteen seventy four by
Speaker 1: Pete lick of Ol Jr. And his wife Cathy. That's incorrect.
Speaker 1: Cathy is Pete's sister, not his wife. So my correction
Speaker 1: is this. Peggy Beggett and Jerry pay Easily were accompanied
Speaker 1: in March nineteen seventy four on their honeymoon to Mexico
Speaker 1: by Pete lack of Ole Jr. And his sister Cathy
Speaker 1: two of mob boss Pete look Ofoly seniors children ten.
Speaker 1: Whether or not his claims are true, why did Paisley
Speaker 1: make them at all? Why did he speak to law enforcement?
Speaker 1: I don't know. However, I've said it before and I'll
Speaker 1: say it again. It is possible Paisley just lied. Maybe
Speaker 1: there's no good reason why. Maybe he was just an asshole.
Speaker 1: But beyond lying for the fun of it, I struggled
Speaker 1: to see any logic a reason why he would make
Speaker 1: these claims if they were false. He got no time
Speaker 1: off his sentence, no media attention, no money, and he
Speaker 1: did not express a boiling hatred of Peggy Baggage. In fact,
Speaker 1: if you read the transcript, even Paisley speculates that she
Speaker 1: didn't really know what she got herself into. In an email,
Speaker 1: Tom Beggatt told me, quote, my family is wearied by
Speaker 1: the things people like Jerry have said for their moment
Speaker 1: of fame or notoriety. End quote. But to Tom, I'd
Speaker 1: ask this, what fame? What notoriety? Paisley spoke about this
Speaker 1: with one journalist before he died. He did not embark
Speaker 1: on a publicity campaign. Paisley even asked his biographer Sean
Speaker 1: Atwood to use a pseudonym after he died, and in
Speaker 1: Atwood's book The Mafia Philosopher, there's no mention of the
Speaker 1: alleged bombing, something you'd figure Paisley would want if he
Speaker 1: craved fame. Finally, if what he wanted was fame and glory,
Speaker 1: why would Paisley downplay his role, Because in the bombing narrative,
Speaker 1: he's not some badass mob guy. He's a glorified delivery
Speaker 1: man who flew a suitcase from Tucson to Anchorage. Past speculation,
Speaker 1: is there anything that backs up paisley story, even parts
Speaker 1: of it? In short? Maybe Paisley told investigators that when
Speaker 1: Peggy Begetts visited Tucson around August nineteen seventy two, he
Speaker 1: used a fake name to book her a room at
Speaker 1: the Spanish Trail Motel. In the FBI records I obtained,
Speaker 1: there are conveniently multiple memos detailing where Paisley lived at
Speaker 1: various points during the summer of nineteen seventy two. June one,
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy two, the Thailand's Motel August eighteen, nineteen seventy two,
Speaker 1: the Spanish Trail Motel September twenty one, nineteen seventy two,
Speaker 1: the Hilton Inn. So the FBI records document that not
Speaker 1: only did Paisley live at the Spanish Trail Mode Tell
Speaker 1: in August nineteen seventy two, when Peggy Baggage allegedly stayed there,
Speaker 1: but also that Paisley moved frequently. So if Paisley lied,
Speaker 1: he had an amazing ability twenty four years later to
Speaker 1: remember exactly where he lived during one month in the
Speaker 1: summer of nineteen seventy two, so that he could incorporate
Speaker 1: that detail into his lie twelve. Did you find anything
Speaker 1: else in the FBI records? Yes, and it's weird again.
Speaker 1: Let me read you part of an FBI memo using
Speaker 1: the word blank for redacted sections. Quote on August twenty three,
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy two Blank telephone. Blank advised that he had
Speaker 1: received information from his Blank that during the early part
Speaker 1: of August nineteen seventy two, Blank had told her that
Speaker 1: he had been brought to the Tucson area by the
Speaker 1: chief of the FBI in New Orleans. He stated that
Speaker 1: this trip had been made on an FBI jet aircraft
Speaker 1: and at several other agents, possibly from the Albuquerque area,
Speaker 1: had a companied Blank and the agent from New Orleans.
Speaker 1: Blank stated that he was told by Blank that upon
Speaker 1: their arrival at Tucson, all of the individuals interviewed Jerry
Speaker 1: Paisley at the airport, and that Paisley had been taken
Speaker 1: to the airport by local Tucson FBI agents end quote.
Speaker 1: So here in an FBI memo we have an allegation
Speaker 1: that Jerry Paisley was taken to the Tucson airport in
Speaker 1: early August nineteen seventy two and interviewed by FBI agents.
Speaker 1: Does the idea of the plane being bombed make any sense? Yes,
Speaker 1: here's what we know. The missing plane likely made it
Speaker 1: through Portage Pass within five to fifteen minutes. It would
Speaker 1: have been within range of the radio relay at Johnstone Point.
Speaker 1: But the pilot Don John's never radioed in again. So,
Speaker 1: as far as I can tell, something catastrophic and sudden
Speaker 1: caused the plane to crash. I've told you why. I
Speaker 1: think mechanical failure and pilot error are unlikely. So what
Speaker 1: does that leave fourteen? Aren't you reading too much into this?
Speaker 1: The simplest explanations still is that the plane iced up
Speaker 1: and crashed. The weather was bad that day. Yes, the
Speaker 1: weather was bad, But let's do an exercise. Let's say
Speaker 1: you put a bomb in my trunk and I drive
Speaker 1: off a cliff during a blizzard. Nobody finds me. Does
Speaker 1: the fact that I drove off a cliff in a
Speaker 1: blizzard mean the bomb wasn't in my trunk? Aren't you
Speaker 1: being extremely unfair to Peggy begat in my opinion? No.
Speaker 1: I gave Miss Baggett and her family plenty of opportunities
Speaker 1: to tell their side of the story. Except for Tom
Speaker 1: Beggatt's emails, they declined to answer any questions, and Charles
Speaker 1: wolf Fourth, their friend, the author who investigated Paisley's claims
Speaker 1: but never published them, posted a message with multiple inaccuracies
Speaker 1: on Facebook last year warning people not to work with me.
Speaker 1: I still want to tell Peggy side of the story.
Speaker 1: She always has an open invitation to do an interview.
Speaker 1: The Beggage is probably figured it was wise not to
Speaker 1: speak with me to deny the story oxygen and hey,
Speaker 1: it worked to some degree. As of this recording, no
Speaker 1: media in Alaska except the Fairbanks Daily News Miner has
Speaker 1: reported this story. Still, it's especially egregious, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: that the Anchorage Daily News hasn't covered it at all.
Speaker 1: Six So what now? Two things? First, the FBI should
Speaker 1: reopen its investigation into Jerry Paisley's claims. There are people
Speaker 1: alive who have answers. It's not too late. Also, the
Speaker 1: Bureau should examine how the case was handled in the
Speaker 1: nineteen nineties. Second, someone should conduct a full search for
Speaker 1: the plane in and around port Edges where Bob Martinson
Speaker 1: found the tailpiece. We searched, but obviously we don't have
Speaker 1: the resources of say the federal government or James camp Rent.
Speaker 1: Now we could go back with more equipment, So if
Speaker 1: you're listening and you want to fund another search, email
Speaker 1: us seriously. If we go back to Port Uches. In
Speaker 1: addition to r o v s or remotely operated vehicles,
Speaker 1: we need at least three other things, a magnetometer, a
Speaker 1: toe behind metal detector, and side scan sonar. A magnetometer
Speaker 1: would allow us to detect certain metals ferris metals like
Speaker 1: iron and steel, but not aluminum. It would allow us
Speaker 1: to search for parts of the plane like the engines.
Speaker 1: A toe behind metal detector, on the other hand, would
Speaker 1: allow us to detect aluminum, and side scan sonar would
Speaker 1: allow us to look at the sea floor. With this equipment,
Speaker 1: if the baggage box plane is in port edges, there's
Speaker 1: a good chance we could find it. Regardless of what
Speaker 1: comes of this show, whether or not the FBI reopens
Speaker 1: its investigation or another search is conducted in Port Uches,
Speaker 1: I will continue to investigate new leads, and we are
Speaker 1: getting them every day. For now, though, this is a
Speaker 1: story with no ending, but even stories with no ending
Speaker 1: deserve to be told. But wait, only a few days
Speaker 1: ago after we finalize this episode, we got some startling
Speaker 1: new information. So even though this was supposed to be
Speaker 1: our final episode, we'll be back. However, at this point
Speaker 1: we're reporting the story in real time, meaning we can't
Speaker 1: publish every week. Stay tuned. No task this week. Instead,
Speaker 1: Questions for the Alaska news media, especially the Anchorage Daily News.
Speaker 1: How long can you ignore the story? When will you
Speaker 1: report it? And why haven't you reported it? Ever? You
Speaker 1: can reach us by phone at one eight three three
Speaker 1: m I A Tips. That's one eight three three six
Speaker 1: four two eight four seven seven again one eight three
Speaker 1: three six four two eight four seven seven, Or you
Speaker 1: can reach us via email at tips at iHeart media
Speaker 1: dot com. That's tips, T I P s at I
Speaker 1: heeart media dot com. And you've already been very helpful.
Speaker 1: Among other things, you helped us find Joe Tatum, the
Speaker 1: last man alive who heard the bizarre radio transmission the
Speaker 1: day of the plane vanished. You helped us find Alex Dressler,
Speaker 1: the reporter who observed Peggy and Paisley's wedding. Dressler did
Speaker 1: not respond to interview requests regardless, thanks to Michael Knacka
Speaker 1: for helping us find him. Finally, you also helped us
Speaker 1: figure out that the photo everyone thought was the last
Speaker 1: known photo of the missing congressman is actually not the
Speaker 1: last known photo of them. There are others. Unfortunately, the
Speaker 1: photographer who did take the final known photos did not
Speaker 1: respond to interview requests. An important note, none of the
Speaker 1: people Jerry Paisley claimed took part in or had knowledge
Speaker 1: of the alleged bombing. Joe Banano, joeyat Tarrola, Danny Zevinich,
Speaker 1: Gene Fowler, Larry Fowler, or Peggy Begat where ever charged
Speaker 1: with or convicted of any crimes tied to any of
Speaker 1: Paisley's allegations. Peggy Begat and Danny Zevenich declined multiple interview requests.
Speaker 1: Gene Fowler was unavailable for an interview. Joe Banano, joeyat Trolla,
Speaker 1: and Larry Fowler are dead. Pete Lacavoli Jr. And Mike
Speaker 1: Lackavoli did not respond to multiple interview requests. We were
Speaker 1: unable to reach Kathy Lookavoli. Pete Lakavoi Senior is dead.
Speaker 1: Ben Bowen is our executive producer. Paul Decant is our
Speaker 1: supervising producer. Chris Brown is our assistant producer. Seth Nicholas
Speaker 1: Johnson is our producer. Sam T. Garden is our research assistant.
Speaker 1: And I'm your host and executive producer, John Wallzac. You
Speaker 1: can find me on Twitter at at John Wallzac, j
Speaker 1: O n w A l se z A k. Our
Speaker 1: team has been amazing. Ben Paul, Chris Seth, and Sam
Speaker 1: thank you and thank you to I Heart for supporting
Speaker 1: this show. Paul is also a filmmaker. He directed a
Speaker 1: movie that came out last year called Annie in the City.
Speaker 1: Check it out on Amazon, A, n n E y
Speaker 1: in the City. On a personal note, thank you to
Speaker 1: my friends and family, especially the three fearless women who
Speaker 1: helped raise me, my mom, aunt and grandma and my
Speaker 1: dad too. A shout out to my alma mater umc Asheville,
Speaker 1: and a special thanks to Jen and Rob for studio
Speaker 1: space and for your support. Missing in Alaska is a
Speaker 1: work of investigative journalism. I spent nine years researching this story,
Speaker 1: but most journalists don't have the luxury of spending years,
Speaker 1: or months or even weeks on a single story. To
Speaker 1: that end, please support local media, regardless of your politics.
Speaker 1: A strong local press is vital to hold everyone accountable,
Speaker 1: and I'd like to ask you a favor. If you can,
Speaker 1: please donate to the Lens, a small nonprofit news outlet
Speaker 1: in my city, New Orleans. Go to the Lens NOLA
Speaker 1: dot org. That's the Lens Nola dot org. Finally, there's
Speaker 1: also an amazing nonprofit that cleans up marine debris and
Speaker 1: Prince William Sound called Gulf of Alaska Keeper or go
Speaker 1: a k Thank you to Chris Pallister, who founded the
Speaker 1: organization for consulting with us before our trip to henshin
Speaker 1: Brook Island. You can learn more about and donate to
Speaker 1: go a K at go a k dot org. That's
Speaker 1: go a k dot org. Missing in Alaska is a
Speaker 1: co production of I Heart Media and Greenfork Media.