I pitch this story. Call it Story A / The Lid. And these guys say, are you sure it’s a book, because it sounds like a podcast? Well it could be, It could be a podcast… and a book. But I’ll tell you something, if you want a podcast, I have a story for a podcast. So I pitch Story B, call it The Device. I say, what’s cool about this idea is that it has elements of Story A. Chronologically it comes after Story A, but I would be telling Story B first. So these elements would foreshadow what would be coming in the book – This is the podcast I was 24 hours away from recording here this weekend, the story I was going to tell over 12 episodes, an entire season, practically a whole year with just one story. And the guy goes… are you sure that’s a podcast? Because that sounds like a really good book. I like that book better than the first book.
So – Story C. This is Who Killed Theresa.
Story C was research. It would probably end up as two paragraphs in Story A, The Lid. It also has elements that reflect, foreshadow, comment… And I am in no hurry to tell this story. I have a lot of information on this case, but I haven’t quite figured out how to land the plane. I haven’t completely worked out the staging. It has all the elements that you’re accustomed to hearing on WTK – set in Quebec, unsolved murder, criminal investigative failures. Quebec lives in this echo chamber of delusion. If you think the fake-news era in the States is bad, Quebec has been living in a version of this landscape ever since Champlain planted a fleur-de-lis on The Mountain. What strikes me about this case is how the narrative has changed over the last 50 years. There is now a very controlled version of this story, and most of the elements that would help solve the case have been dropped. I don’t buy the versions of this story peddled by the police and the press.
This is the 1969 unsolved murder of Teresa Martin.