ABOUT INSIDE DATELINE

Inside Dateline is your Web line into Studio 3B, providing you with a personal behind-the-scenes look at how we bring you our stories.

Whether it's a gripping crime tale, a hidden camera investigation, or a celebrity newsmaker profile -- Dateline correspondents and producers spend days, months, and sometimes even years researching and reporting the story. Learn more about what goes on inside our investigations, and find out more about some of the people we've met.

Ann Curry hosts Dateline. Dateline's producers, correspondents and host post here often. Previews to upcoming stories, more information on our reports, and follow-ups can be found on this blog.



The crying game

Posted: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:03 PM by Dateline Editor
Filed Under: , , ,

By Josh Mankiewicz, Dateline Correspondent

The guy reminded me of my grandfather. Same western shirt, same cowboy boots, same Brylcreem in his hair. Except that I never saw my grandfather cry.

Now, this fellow wasn't blubbering, but he'd choke up every so often and a tear would form, which he'd dab away with some Kleenex wadded up in his fist. And I just sat there and did nothing. Normally, when someone starts crying in the middle of a conversation, your urge is to get out of your chair and put your arm around them, or at least tell them how sorry you are. But this was television, so I just soldiered on.

He was talking about his daughter, who'd been killed by her husband. And sadly, he was one of six straight interviews I'd done for Dateline in which the person sitting across from me was crying. We cover a lot of murder cases at Dateline, and in each case, the person I was interviewing was telling me about the worst thing that had ever happened to them; the sister, the best friend, the wife taken from them suddenly and through violence.

Television is pretty good at showcasing emotion, and there was a time when getting someone to cry on-camera was hugely desirable. "Did she squirt?" one high-profile TV doctor used to ask his producers after they returned from an interview. I suppose there are still people who seek out the tears, but I'm not one of them.

One disclaimer here: Whenever people I'm interviewing start to cry, I almost always ask them if they'd like to take a minute to compose themselves, and sometimes they do. The problem comes when virtually the entire subject you're discussing is so wrenching that tears start flowing every 15 seconds, which makes stopping and starting a poor option, and may actually prolong the interview and thus, your subject's agony as well. So in those situations, I just go on and ask the next question.

The problem with doing that is that to ignore someone else's tears, you have to shut off part of yourself, that part that makes you want to reach out to an adult so shattered by the memories you're provoking that they start to cry. And whenever I do that, I always wonder if that part of me will automatically turn back on when the interview is concluded. So far, it always has. If I sense someday that it hasn't, I'll be facing a tough choice about continuing in this line of work, which has paid my rent for 34 years.

All of that brings me to Tom Richardson, convicted in court of murdering his wife Juanita by pushing or throwing her off a cliff on the shores of Lake Superior, 140 feet to her death.

Richardson gave me an interview not long after his conviction, and under Dateline's lights, we went back over the details of the day Juanita died. At different times in the interview, he would suddenly start to sob, his voice cracking. Seconds later, he'd be composed again, speaking in that flat Michigan accent that made him sound like a homicidal Sonny Bono.

I never saw any actual tears, which made me wonder -- just as Park Rangers at the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore wondered when Tom first reported that his wife was missing. One minute, they reported, he was sobbing with his head in his hands; the next, he was perfectly composed. Add to that the three different stories he told police in the first 12 hours after Juanita's death and you have grounds for the suspicion that put Richardson at the center of a murder investigation, and eventually led to his conviction. He is asking for a new trial.

I'd love to cover some stories in which I don't have to ask anyone if they'd like to take a break and dry their tears.  I can ask. But I'm sure not counting on it.

Click here for the whole story of what happened at Pictured Rocks.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

It was not fair of you to TELL your interviewee that "you killed your wife."  What a joke.  I'm not sure what I believe in the case,  but I do know that you didn't do a very good job.  Only John Quinones could do worse.
The story commented on how the picture looked like I am going to get you @#%.  To me it looked like he set the camera up to take a picture of himself and she didn't take it at all. I wonder if they even investigated that possibilty. If they found the camera over the edge of the cliff there is nothing to say he didn't throw it down himself.
It certainly didn't seem to me the standard of " beyond a reasonable doubt" was anywhere nearly achieved by the government.
Try watching your own biased interview Josh, and you will see Richardson tearing up.
I think the guy was railroaded twice, the second time by MSNBC.
I have just one question.  Where was Tom Richardson on the 31st of May, 2006?  Was he at the pictured rocks on that date too?
hello, I justed watched dateline covering the murder of Juanita Richarson "Murder".
This poor fella, I feel did not get a fair trial. I feel that there was other conflicting evidance other then Tom Richarson three stories.
For starters, Juanita Richarson's parent said that she was affraid of hieghts, that she would have never gotten that close to the edge of the cliff. If that is true then that means that tom Richareson would have had to carry her to the edge to throw her over.If that's what happened police would have found skin under her finger nails form the struggle and Tom would have recevied stratches from the struggle. Evidance did not show a struggle or any skin under her finger nails. Tom had No injuries..So was she affraid of hieghts????because the evideance shown was that Juanita was at the edge of the cliff. NOW, if she was affraid of heights like her family stated, then if junania managed to get the courage to walk to the edge of the clip...their is a very good possible that once she got to the edge she got veritgo and gotten dizzy or even passed out that would have made her fall. Let me tell you a thing about being afraid of hieghts. My wife is afraid of heights and when she gets close to the edge of some place high, she gets dizzy and feels like she wants to pass out....That is what could have happened to juanita.
Second, the two bruises she had on the back of her leg could have came from a branch if they were hiking. Or from another stubble..if Tom kicked her from behind.. why was their two marks..One kick probably would have been suffcient..
Thirdly, The three story from Tom can be explained by the truma... let me say i was in an auto accident and at first you don't remember everything.. Your mind goes in to slow motion and blocks things out at first. It's the way the brain deals with a tramitic event. After some time passes you begin to sort and fill in more of the pieces that you could not remember earlier. And the police have a nack at twisting the truth and cohorsing someone the tell them what they want to hear...Your tied, you just had a trumatic expireance, you don't really remember things clearly yet and the police make you fill in the pieces....
With that much said. If I was a juror their would not have been enough evidance in this for me to convict Tom Richarson with murder.
I appreciate your ability to interview and powers of observation. I have followed this case since a time when I found myself incarcerated in July 2007. Before that, I had never even heard of Tom Richardson and the Pictured Rocks incident.

Because of my social anxiety and PTSD I was placed in isolation from the general population in the Alger county jail. That's when and where I met Tom. He too was isolated from the general population. We had inmates come and go, but only for short periods of time. For over two months, I spent 24/7 with Tom. It only took a few weeks for me to decipher and conclude.

I didn't voice this epiphany and in order for others to understand the reasoning they would have to have walked my path. Beside, nobody wanted to hear it. Especially Tom, Juanita's family and especially the authorities.

Retrospective knowledge.

My Mother and I were very close. Talked all the time and confided each others feelings, be they sad or joyful. I lost her in 1986. These past five years my ex sister-in-law became my best friend and I was certain (as she told me) that I was her best friend. We shared each others feelings like the closest of brothers and sisters.

My Mother committed suicide in 1986. In July of 2007, my best friend hung herself.

Tom Richardson would never have been a friend of mine. I prefer football to autoracing as a spectator sport. I respect women to a fault. I am a Christian but disagree adamantly with Tom's theology. I am a recluse, he is a people person. That's just for starters.

I taught him the basics of chess. Other than that our interractions were limited to books, theology, and life history tales. After such proximity and my observations of emotions, nightmares, confusions, intelligence (or lack of) and demeanor, there is no way that man could or would kill anyone let alone Juanita. In laymans terms, "He hasn't got the testicles".

I came to understand the personalities and ambitious reputations of the authorities involved. It's all great fodder for my novel. It won't be a Norman Mailer 'Executioner's Song', but I am enjoying writing it.

Just one mans observations.

Saw  the segment on TV. The guy turns emotions on and off like a facuet.  His demeanor and lack of real tears brings one conclusion. He murdered his wife.
I find your objectivity suspect and your comment "speaking in that flat Michigan accent that made him sound like a homicidal Sonny Bono" offensive. Is that really necessary? This is a person's life here. A family's father, a human being.

I watched the episode twice. I think you need to go back over this case and the facts more carefully. The evidence the state presented -- and that you reported with such zeal -- was very circumstantial. Extremely circumstantial. I am shocked that he was convicted on that evidence and disappointed that you reported this story in the manner that you did.

Example: The insurance funds, when you consider how much all the policies added up to, it is not that much when you consider mortgage and other debts they had.

Example: A pre-meditated murderer I would have to think would have done a better job at sticking to a single story. The guy was under extreme duress. That's obvious.

Example: Grief. People deal with it differently. People cry and express their emotions differently. On the interview I saw on the show, I did see tears. I saw a lot of emotion. And I also saw a reporter who didn't believe his subject, who already had his mind made up.

There are more. I wish you would go back and audit your reporting and get a third party to help you do it -- I think your objectivity is really screwy with this one.
Well, aren't we all so lucky to have correspondences, sheriffs and sisters who can tell a real cry from a fake one and actually tell us if it was a murder or accident because of their view even though they never saw it or had any proof. Some day possible they'll get the same treatment and I beat I know how they'll feel when the shoe is on the other foot. Maybe he did it and maybe he didn't, but none of us will never know for sure. I do know that Juanita's spirit isn't hovering around Painted Rocks so her sister needs to get some help.
Dear Mr. Mankiewicz, I would like to play devil's advocate based upon my own husband's death. Fortunately for me, I had overwhelming proof that I did not kill my husband.I can totally relate to T. Richardson's behavior after his wife's death.I went through the same emotions. Unlike Richarson, I suspected that my husband was suicidal and I went to his employer, his family and friends for help. We had separated and I feared for my life and our child's.After his suicide, his family went after me in a financial frenzy, they were the recipients of his life insurance, they wanted to make sure they got it. If they could have charged me for his death, they would have. After many years in probate, my son and I got barely nothing and I had to pay the attorneys and have been in debt ever since.I had blackouts in remembering the incidences because it was so traumatic. If I would have been questioned by the police, I would have responded similarly: with waves of emotion. I think your reporting is very biased and it's obvious that you have taken a side. It's obvious that you have never been confronted with critical confrontation in your life. I thought reporters were suppose to write stories to allow readers to create their own thought. It makes me sad that you present such a biased representation.  
He said he had to crawl to the edge of the cliff to look when his wife fell. but yet there is his picture by the cliff,looking evil and with clean knees.GOOD JOB JURY HE IS EXACTLY WHERE HE DESERVES TO BE!
The Sunday PM broadcast of June 29, 2008 re a woman who died from a fall a cliff in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. This was not one of the brighter episodes of Dateline.
There was much about the story presented, as edited for this story, that didn't add up. The aggressive one-on-one treatment by the NBC interviewer of the husband was uncomfortable to watch. Before the man (now prisoner) mentioned his bumbling of stories early on, it not difficult to picture he was probably in a state of initial emotional shock at the moment.
I saw the show and by the way you are good at what you do! Should be paying the mortgage not rent by now !  :)

I did see that tears when he was talking to you, didn't I?
Why would a happily married man spend so much time on the phone with another woman? What did he mean by asking her to wait for him?
The last picture his wife took tells it all.
My 21 year old son's reaction to the dateline story was one of mild shock.  "Where did that emotion come from?", he asked in regard to Tom.  You see, my son was over at the Richardson's the Saturday night following Juanita's death, and in the 4-5 hours he was there, Tom never showed ANY sadness.  Rather he was joking about how her dog was going to miss her.  My son came home that night and woke us up to tell us how weird Tom acted and that he didn't seem to act like someone who had just lost his wife.  So our family finds all this emotion from Tom now to be rather interesting.
I am convinced that he did kill his wife BUT tears or the lack of tears are not a fool proof clue.  They can mean anything...tears can be for real, they could be because he did it and is sorry..lack of tears mean nothing.  It can be shock that causes no tears to come.  I am tired of people saying guilty/not guilty as to tears shed or not shed.
Take a good look at the "last picture". Where's his wedding ring. Unless I messed something but he's not wearing one.
To anyone who thinks that evidence against Richardson was "just circumstantial" as if that says it's "flimsy" and not enough to convict:
ALL evidence apart from confessions and eye-witness is circumstantial.
And any good attorney would tell you that a solid circumstantial web of evidence is far more compelling than say, eye-witness identification which is known to be the least reliable of evidence. Or even confessions which can be false or coerced and have to be corroborated by CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Tom Richardson was justly convicted, in my opinion.
After watching this report last night, I came away disgusted and very angry with the reported who did the story. The way he reported this and questioned Mr Richardson was dripping with 'HIS OPNION' of Mr Richardson's quilt. I have come to expect this level or information from NBC, the National BIAS Company. NBC and Dateline the level to which you report information is something that is so typical of television reporting today. You have truely set the bar to a new low level. It's no wonder NBC (and the other networks) are losing market and are going to fail. This report was so judgemental and biased NBC should be ashamed and apologize for the level of reporting.
You and the police seem to miss an important point to the story. Why did the husband leave the wife alone to use the restroom? My husband would NEVER leave me alone in the woods unless I had our German Shepherd with me, but even then I doubt it. He would either pee in the bushes, hold it in, or have me walk back to the restrooms with him.
One other thing about his emotions...grieving a loss is only one reason for tears.  Regret & remorse, coupled with guilt, could also produce such reactions.
I don't think the authorities need evidence to convict people, circumstancial or otherwise.  If they think you did it, they won't even look at any other evidence.  As soon as they started looking at Richardson for the murder, he might as well say "I give up, take me to prison."  My brother was convicted of a murder and they didn't even have a body, only so called "circumstancial evidence"--the legal system is a joke.
I followed this case on the internet, watched the trial, witnesses, all the testimony. Dateline had to leave a lot out of the story for time, I am sure. There were many conversations recalled about how Tom was looking to get debt free, about him showing up at Brophy's house after his wife's death, more from the lawyer that explained the will situation in greater detail, and that Tom indeed was the one that set up the appointment for the will and that Juanita didn't want to do it. Richardson is a theatrical mess that got what he deserved! His children were clearly measuring out what to remember during the trial and what to say, "I don't recall" to so as not to incriminate their father. I guess it might be natural for the kids to not want to lose their other parent...but clearly...they didn't tell the full story of what went on in that home! I thought this piece was informative but could have used the full two hours to cover the rest of the highlights from that trial! All those law enforcement, rangers, investigators all deal with and have been trained to deal with lie detection, watching body language, etc. so is it a coincidence that they all thought Tom was not being honest? Three different accounts later....maybe with his life sentence, he will have time to concoct a more believable story!
For anyone who followed the entire trial, there could be little doubt as to Richardson's guilt.  Please remember that this Dateline show packed a year and a half of investigation and interviews in to a one hour summary.  They did not include any trial footage of the testimony of the kids best friends impeaching the lying Richardson children.  Many other facts were also ommited from the show, I am sure due to time constraints.  Anyone who wants to make a true judgement as to his innocence or guilt should review all of the trial footage, you might just change your mind.

As to the "fake crying", I have never seen it worse.  He sure wasn't crying at all when he was telling the undercover police officer about his wife toppling over the cliff and hearing her scream on the way down.  As a matter of fact, it sounded to me like he could have been describing any insignificant life event.  I wonder if the tears would have been flowing if he knew he was being recorded then??    

Sadly, I think Dateline was a little more concerned with getting a dramatic news program than having an objective discussion.

I don't know if he killed her. I know this didn't convince me. I think intelligent, reasoned, and well minded viewers will be turned off by this Dateline.

Even though I live only a hour away from Pictured Rocks, I found myself unable to get caught up in the dramatics this program presented.
Saw the story, read the article, and still don't know if he is guilty or not guilty.  The fact that so many people are conflicted about this case highlights to me the dearth of concrete evidence presented by the State.  The standard of proof of our judicial system is "beyond a reasonable doubt".  When we convict a man because he tells different versions of traumatic events and because he doesn't cry on cue the way we think a grieving widower should, we have not held the State to their burden of proof.  There simply is not enough evidence here to convict.  "50-50" is not beyond a reasonable doubt.
Well, I think he did kill her. I think Kelly Brophy is also involved or at the very least had prior knowledge that this murder was going to take place. They are both lying about their affair. I believe his plan was to kill off Juanita, let things cool down for a year or so, then bring Kelly into the family home. The lack of emotion and babbling different versions of the story alone make one wonder but then factor in the other woman and it all is very clear what went on that day at Pictured Rocks. Tom you should be ashamed of what you have put your kids through and for taking their mother away from them! A divorce, though time and money consuming, would have guarenteed your freedom and let those kids have their mother as well! You are a selfish, sorry excuse for a human being!
I see from the comments being made about Mr. Richardson that most of the ones who have sided with him are male.  Excuse me, but this man had every intention of killing his wife.  He wanted to get his house paid off and start dating again; remember, that life insurance policy was enough to do just that.  Even if he didn't have a sexual affair, he had an emotional one, and that was just enough for him to want to be rid of Juanita. I think the MSP did an honorable job in charging this guy with murder. He deserves everything he gets!!
By the way Josh,we do not have a "flat Michigan accent".
Dear Dateline,

Please, won't you please stop sensationalizing these murder/rape stories about white women? You do it every week and it's become overkill. If I didn't know any better I'd think Dateline actually enjoys it. You're starting to become as perverted and creepy as the murderers themselves.

Please find other stories to do and give the White Women In Peril stories a rest already. Quit exploiting dead women for your own pleasure.
Bloggers:
Please keep in mind that you cannot cover a two year investigation in just one hour. Many, many facts were not and could not have possibly been covered in such a short time. Check the court records if you are truly interested.

Also, keep in mind that circumstantial evidence is often the best. Each person has a little bit of the story. When you put the pieces together you get the big picture.

In response to changing stories - shock and trauma are not the only explanations. As criminals are questioned, as they play the crime over and over in their minds, they think of more, and what they believe may be better "stories." They change their stories and create excuses for not telling the truth the previous time. I've been through it with my brother's murderer. The story changed every time he thought of a new excuse or was confronted with yet another piece of evidence. It didn't work for him either.


F. Ortiz: The picture of him on the cliff was *before* his wife fell over, as she is the one that supposedly took it.
I thought his emotion was fake lookingduring the interview. And I thought his explaination for his picture looking so emotionless for being on a honeymoon was lame. Also calling another woman 382 times in 10 months?? He had to be planning this poorly exiacuted murder!!
I would like to find out if you have complaint against rental car companies, failing to abide by their own contract and making out new rules along the way; specially if you filed a complaint to their legal department. Their legal department.
If you have other complaint against them please let me know because i believed the rental car company  utilize predatory practices against people renting vehicle in another states or cities.  taking advantage of situations.
He did it. That was my only thought when I had first heard the news on Juanita's death so long ago. The interview with Tom just solidified what most of this town already believes.
I don't know the family, but I am related to someone who knew them very well. This relative did not believe that Tom was capable of anything so rotten, until he opened his mouth.
My kids knew Mrs. Richardson through school and in such a small community where things like this just don't happen, I'd like to throw Tom off a cliff myself. I should not have had to try and explain this situation to my 10yr. old.
Seeing Juanita's body at the bottom of the cliff made me sick to my stomach. He is exactly where he belongs.
My heart goes out to the Culver family as well as Juanita's kids. I just hope that someday they will wake up & see the truth that is staring at them from behind a glass barrier.
You guys are morons, have you never experienced trauma in your life. I can remember when I found out my best friend had shot himself, I was out running and another friend stopped me is his car and told me and I just said ok and continue on my run for about 5 miles. Later that night i went out to the movies, it wasn't until a day later when it actually caught up with me and had the real emotion/tears and sadness.

use some dam common sense
My reaction to the dateline story was frustration.  While there were conflicting story, there was ultimately not enough evidence to convict someone of murder.  To take someone's freedom away is a big thing, especially when emotions CAN be turned on and off like a faucet in times of grieving.  It's like going to a close friend's funeral.  One minute you're crying, the next you're sharing funny memories of that person. Then you cry again.  

The end of the episode where it was believed that the "bruise" on Juanita's leg was due to kicking her off the cliff.  Juanita's family was adamant that she wouldn't be next to the edge because she's too afraid of heights, yet they are okay with the story that she was standing close enough to get kicked off?  Which side of the story is the truth?
Truth is memory exactly as we lived it in extreme detail as it is a traumatic event.Lies cannot be told the same way twice.I know that at times we want to believe someone for fear that if we get it wrong they make a fool of us and I also believe that it is thier intention to do just that.I dont believe that under such duress that they tell a story three different ways.your brain has no memory of a lie,it has to fill in the blanks for the untruths. truth is commited to memory at all times.He is a liar.
This story is ridiculous.  It's all speculation. You expect everyone to fit insie your little box and act a certain way when someone dies and not everyone is made from the same mold.  For pete's sake... you don't know for sure if the guy killed his wife. I don't think he did, even after reading this story twice.  I wouldn't of convicted him.  There is no evidence.  Where is it?  What the heck was someone doing up on a freakin cliff afraid of heights.  I am afraid of heights. I do not hang out on Rocks or cliffs.  I get dizzy.  For crying out loud, you would feel dizzy and faint like you were having an anxiety attack of sorts.  That is what happens when you are afraid of something like that.  There is no way she would get close to the edge.  This just seems like a normal guy to me who lost his wife.  When something traumatic happens you can't remember everything you should.  Why is it everytime there is a measly life insurance policy, we think the person had to be murdered?
Of course he killed her.  With forensics and so much evidence these days, we are merely catching spousal killings a little more often than in years gone by.  

What surprises me is the amount of couples that dont kill each other.  Me bad.
My girlfriends and I were sitting next to Josh and family last night at Dan Tanas for dinner we were celebrating my birthday, I would like to set him up with my friend, she was the pretty blond in the middle...if Josh recalls sitting next to us and may be interested, my e-mail is... magmia06@yahoo.com...


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://insidedateline.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1174751