Send us Fan Mail

Thirty-eight bodies recovered from Lady Bird Lake. A bar district full of late-night energy just blocks away. And a story that keeps resurfacing every time Austin tries to move on. We’re Brandy and Chris, and we’re back on Rainey Street to sort out what’s real, what’s rumor, and what the evidence can actually say when fear is doing the loudest talking.

We walk through how the “Rainey Street Ripper” theory caught fire, why social media sleuthing and clustering maps felt convincing, and what we know about the victim patterns people keep pointing to. We also talk about the questions that make this case stick: the walk from the nightlife strip to the water, the darkness and brush near the lake, reports of people vanishing after stepping away for a minute, and why families may struggle to accept “accident” as an answer.

Then we lay out what the Austin Police Department has stated repeatedly: no consistent trauma, no common suspect, and drowning listed as the primary cause of death in the majority of cases. We also cover the one confirmed homicide tied to the lake, plus the 2025 collaboration between Texas State University and APD that reviewed nearly 200 drowning cases to see whether the Lady Bird Lake numbers are unusual or tragically normal. If you care about Austin true crime, Lady Bird Lake drownings, and how serial killer rumors spread, this conversation gives you the clearest framework we’ve found.

Subscribe for more Texas true crime, share this with a friend who has a theory, and leave us a review. After you listen, do you think this is a hidden pattern or a modern panic?

www.texaswineandtruecrime.com

Send us Fan Mail

A car left in the Sears upper lot. Christmas gifts still inside. A letter to “Thomas” that Rachel likely never wrote. Nearly five decades after the Fort Worth Trio vanished from a Texas shopping center, we return to the heart of the mystery and scrutinize the few artifacts that have ever mattered: the Oldsmobile, the layaway jeans, a handful of shaky eyewitness accounts, and a baffling note that arrived almost too fast for 1974 holiday mail.

We walk step by step through the known timeline—Rachel, Renee, and Julie shopping on December 23rd—then trace the details that undercut the “runaway” narrative. The gifts weren’t opened. The keys were left behind. Promises to be home by two were never casual. From there, we turn to the letter: addressed to “Thomas” instead of “Tommy,” penned with language that family says doesn’t sound like Rachel, bearing a debated postmark and a misspelling awkwardly corrected. Handwriting reviews never bring certainty; modern opinions suggest none of the girls wrote it. So why write it—and why so quickly—unless the goal was to distract, delay, and misdirect?

We balance two competing frameworks. On one side: the local context of the 1970s and 1980s—multiple unsolved disappearances, confirmed serial predators, open land where evidence disappears, and the grim reality that stranger-on-stranger crimes are hardest to solve. On the other: the intimate signals around Rachel—household tensions, the letter’s personal address, and the question of whether someone close would risk acting when two other girls were with her. Could one person control three victims in daylight, or does this scenario demand at least two offenders—or a trusted face that lowered every guard?

Along the way, we surface a haunting footnote: a private investigator who later died by suicide and ordered his case files destroyed. Whether that choice reflects despair, fear, or protection, it pulls potential clues out of reach and leaves the car, the purchases, and the letter to carry the investigative weight. If the note is a map, it points to someone close. If it’s a smokescreen, it favors a predator in motion.

If this case grips you as deeply as it grips us, share the episode with a friend, hit follow, and leave a review with your theory—does the letter expose the culprit, or hide them in plain sight?

www.texaswineandtruecrime.com

Send us Fan Mail

A forged Warhol can fool a buyer, but it can’t outrun metadata. We open the year with a case where art fraud, marital strain, and a chilling digital footprint converge: the murder of Ana Walshe and the conviction of her husband, Brian. What began with forged “Shadows” and private checks morphed into a slow-burn crisis—federal charges, stalled accountability, and a family split between Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. Anna built a new life and a new home, hoping legal closure would reunite her with her children. Instead, a New Year’s dinner became the last time friends saw her alive.

We chart the full arc of the Warhol scheme: the borrowed originals, the convincing reproductions, the eBay listings under Ana’s name, and the LA gallery deal that unraveled when frames came off and stamps were missing. Then the focus shifts to January 2023—store receipts, hydrogen peroxide, a mask on camera, and a cascade of searches on household devices about decomposition, trash routes, and CCTV retention. There was no body to recover, but the tools seized carried her DNA, and the surveillance trail showed where the evidence went. Friends and a boyfriend added context: a woman pleading for accountability, longing for her kids, and trying to chart a path forward.

The defense offered a story of sudden death and panic; the jury took six hours to return a first-degree murder verdict. We lay out why: motive grounded in control, money, and exposure; method captured by timestamps and purchase histories; and a portrait of a man whose fraud spilled from galleries into a marriage. It’s a rare no-body case that underscores how search history, receipts, and cameras can replace the physical evidence we expect. Listen for a clear, human look at the choices that led here, the investigation that tied them together, and the hard questions left behind for Ana’s family.

If this resonated, share the episode with a friend, follow the show, and leave a review—your support helps more listeners find thoughtful, evidence-driven true crime stories.

www.texaswineandtruecrime.com