Matt

Kohler was brought in, I think, in 2006 to investigate.

Kohler was brought in, I think, in 2006 to investigate.

Yeah. But he first gets involved in the case in 1997.

Yeah. But he first gets involved in the case in 1997.

On like January 2nd or 3rd. Yeah. Because he and he had been a Boulder police detective. He then took a promotion to go to Telluride and be the police chief. And, like I said, the most Colorado stakeout of all time, them skiing down the mountain literally behind Pasta Jay Alowski.

On like January 2nd or 3rd. Yeah. Because he and he had been a Boulder police detective. He then took a promotion to go to Telluride and be the police chief. And, like I said, the most Colorado stakeout of all time, them skiing down the mountain literally behind Pasta Jay Alowski.

Yeah.

Yeah.

My favorite thing has been all of the people from Boulder in the comments were like, what do you mean Pasta Jay was involved in this?

My favorite thing has been all of the people from Boulder in the comments were like, what do you mean Pasta Jay was involved in this?

Schiller, I have found, he, again, hasn't really said anything that's contradicted Thomas and Kohler. He provides information that they don't. mainly because Thomas wrote his from his own perspective, and Kohler wrote his based on the case files and his own investigation, and him knowing Steve Thomas. Schiller's book brings in a lot more people.

Schiller, I have found, he, again, hasn't really said anything that's contradicted Thomas and Kohler. He provides information that they don't. mainly because Thomas wrote his from his own perspective, and Kohler wrote his based on the case files and his own investigation, and him knowing Steve Thomas. Schiller's book brings in a lot more people.

But not many of them that are that related to the case.

But not many of them that are that related to the case.

That's the thing. For example, he will quote Mason on things. And in those circumstances, I take what Schiller wrote. What I don't like to do is take anything that Schiller has that comes from a source that he doesn't directly cite.

That's the thing. For example, he will quote Mason on things. And in those circumstances, I take what Schiller wrote. What I don't like to do is take anything that Schiller has that comes from a source that he doesn't directly cite.

He won't necessarily cite people, but he'll summarize information without saying, and this came from this place and that came from this place. Thomas will say, and Tom Trujillo told me this, and I learned this from Eller, and I myself investigated this. Sergeant Wickman said this. Got it. And Kohler will do the same thing. Schiller writes his.

He won't necessarily cite people, but he'll summarize information without saying, and this came from this place and that came from this place. Thomas will say, and Tom Trujillo told me this, and I learned this from Eller, and I myself investigated this. Sergeant Wickman said this. Got it. And Kohler will do the same thing. Schiller writes his.

But those are basically those are case studies written by the investigators. Schiller's is more of a comprehensive book trying to cover all of the information. So on my end, there are some things that Schiller says that are technically secondary sources because he is quoting somebody else. Whereas Thomas is a primary source. Thomas was there. Schiller asked Thomas a question.

But those are basically those are case studies written by the investigators. Schiller's is more of a comprehensive book trying to cover all of the information. So on my end, there are some things that Schiller says that are technically secondary sources because he is quoting somebody else. Whereas Thomas is a primary source. Thomas was there. Schiller asked Thomas a question.