Episode Transcript
this is episode 5 the Sheila Davaloo
story
[Music]
Hi everyone and welcome to this week’s
episode of women and crime today’s case
is one I recently encountered and it is
the story of a woman who is either a
savage murderer or as she says a woman
guilty of a vicious crime just not
murder hi Amy hi Megan
so glad to see you and of course I’m
excited about my case as we both do that
this like yes yes this case was not on
my original list but I saw an episode of
the leader not snapped and became really
interested and so I went down the rabbit
hole and I put it on my list and I can’t
wait to tell you all the details and
then discuss let’s do it so you have you
heard of Sheila Davaloo I have not I
hadn’t either which for me was odd rare
yeah yeah most of these cases I’ve at
least heard the name so Sheila was born
in in Iran but she and her family
moved to the United States in the mid
s just prior to the Iranian
Revolution when Ayatollah Khomeini took
over during the time she was a child and
when she was there there was a lot of
political turmoil and so she experienced
a lot of firsthand violence witnessed
bombings was a part of serious violence
and she says that you know rightfully so
that this really traumatized her for the
course of her life and she would later
on relive some of these traumatic events
so Sheila came here with her family and
by all accounts had a good background
had a good family had a nice childhood
after she left Iran Sheila is well
educated and again comes from a good
family she has a degree in biochemistry
and she after graduating accepted a good
position as a research scientist at
Purdue Pharma so her backgrounds a
little different than some of our or
some of the usual female offenders
Sheila was married twice her first
husband divorced her after learning of
her affair with Paul Christo’s who would
later go on to become
number two but I think you will agree
that husband number one was the luckier
of the two men okay
at the time he probably didn’t think so
because he was cheated on but when I
tell you the story you might feel
differently
so this well-educated woman she’s
married twice
all right let’s fast forward a little
bit to her relationship with her second
husband Paul Christo’s on March rd
Sheila and her husband Paul were
spending a casual day at their home in
Pleasantville New York I’m sorry how
long were they married at this point
they were married three years the
relationship is staggering a bit and but
Sheila suggests you know that they kind
of play a sexual game that day to spice
things up a little
ooh hell so she gets out the blindfold
and handcuffs and suggests they kind of
do a thing like I’m gonna touch you with
different objects so you you know maybe
this’ll be like a feather or you know
you’ve maybe heard of this game a little
bit and so Paul was like okay you know
who doesn’t want to play that kind of
game and you know it was an attempt by
Sheila to reconnect a little bit because
they hadn’t been connecting so much so
Paul wore a blindfold and he was waiting
to hear or waiting to feel which objects
Sheila was going to touch him with and
it turns out that object would be a
knife because Sheila stabbed him in the
chest
what yes while he was blindfolded she
stabbed him in the chest and he cried
out in pain obvious understandably
understandably and she apologized
quickly and and started this frenzied
moment where Paul is going oh my god
call call — you know I you
stabbed me and she’s going okay I’m
gonna call — it was almost like she
didn’t know what she had done and that
was kind of how she would explain it
later on but so they wind up in the
house for a while and Sheila says she
called were busy with sorry
believe that way no I’m trying to hold a
straight face because it’s important but
so it’s kind of unbelievable since
she says I called him and won but they
said I’m sorry we’re busy we’ll get to
you kind of later and so he’s like oh my
god well you have to take me to the
hospital then clearly so Sheila does she
puts him in the car and they drive to
Westchester Medical Center which is in
New York but Sheila doesn’t drive to the
emergency room parking lot she goes
right past it and pulls into the parking
lot of the psych unit which is bizarre
right so she’s driven him to the
hospital but she’s passed by okay she
parks the car in that parking lot and
she goes into the backseat apparently
again and we’ll discuss what happened
during this time later but she stabbed
him in the chest again in the parking
lot oh he was in the backseat he was in
the backseat I guess he laid down or you
know D me so she brought the knife with
her brought the knife with her and she
stabs him in the chest again and Paul
fights back and obviously he he grabbed
the knife and he threw it and some
people actually saw the incident and
they rushed over to help Paul and Sheila
got in the car and sped away with Paul
left on the sidewalk yes
but Paul was next to the hospital so
they got hauled to the hospital but
Sheila doesn’t know at this point she’s
taken off and she doesn’t know what
Paul’s condition is right because she
stabbed him twice in the chest and one
of the injuries was very close it was
either super close to the heart or
nicked the heart we’re talking about
possibly fatal wounds here so Paul’s
taken to the ER but Sheila is quickly
arrested she decides to talk so she
talks during the interrogation without a
lawyer
which is surprising we know that an
interrogation some people will either
say no or they’ll demand a lawyer which
is their right
though she waived her right she waived
her right yeah and decided to talk and
she seemed frazzled you know she seemed
confused but this was her first so
they’re like trying to get an idea of
what’s going on here so Sheila first
says that Paul came home from work
having already been stabbed like he came
home with a chest wound
and they were like you know what and
this is when they kind of reveal that
they have Paul’s version because Paul
survived the attack they caught him to
the hospital in time and he lived and
they say Paul told us that you actually
stabbed him so Sheila changes the story
because now we have you know now this
this idea that Paul was stabbed ahead of
time it’s not gonna fly so Sheila goes
into another story and the story is
pretty much that she accidentally
stabbed him during this game and she’s
like like if she explains it almost like
at first like Paul just moved into the
knife right I think and why she’s
holding a knife during this game is
beyond me but then she you know she it
was a ridiculous story and she admitted
that that was pretty much a lie so the
interrogation painted Sheila into a
corner of lies and I think she said
ultimately that she she stabbed him she
doesn’t know why she had almost like a
post-traumatic stress incident and she
just had like basically an episode of
violence that she could not really but
it happened twice yes but she will
explain that so the way she explained
the second time because that’s what they
said well okay you stabbed him once
maybe maybe that you had some momentary
lapses and you just freaked out or you
know maybe you see this guy tied up and
all sudden your game you know traumatize
you but why did you stab him the second
time in the parking lot and what she
says is that they got into an
altercation in the parking lot she you
know he was yelling at her and she
basically says that he took the knife
and she thought he was gonna stab her
like she basically thought she was in
danger so she’s claiming self-defense
for the second stab
pretty much and I mean her her excuse is
look I know it sounds crazy but why
would I Drive my Hut why wouldn’t I just
keep stabbing him he was hot right he
was bound so why wouldn’t I just stab
him and finish the job at home like why
would I Drive him to the hospital I
uncuffed him I drove him to the hospital
I made sure that he got and you know got
medical attention at least I was trying
to do that so if I wanted to kill him
why wouldn’t I just kill him when I had
the opportunity to do so because you’re
crazy
[Laughter]
you know something like that okay so
detectives are you know they’re really
working to try to figure this out like
you know is Sheila is this she a brutal
premeditated murderer or is she just
yeah a little nutty did she snap okay
properly on snap I would say so they get
Sheila’s cell phone and that’s I mean
usually a lot of these investigations
what year was this in I’m sorry he
probably said it mm cell phones were
available they were available and
probably people also didn’t know what
authorities could do with cell phones
which is good now we all know right if
we can trace your phone calls and your
text you can’t delete anything but at
that time I don’t think people knew so
they get ahold of Sheila’s cell phone
and saw a phone number to someone named
Nelson and they quickly discovered
Nelson Sessler a co-worker of Sheila’s
at Purdue Pharma and they contacted him
and he had some shocking information so
what’s the information Nelson said that
he and Sheila had dated for about a year
on and off and only had I guess split
maybe the year before so they did it for
about a year and probably had split for
a little bit but then you’ll hear later
they got back together so he’s claiming
they were having an affair pretty much
married no here’s the interesting part
Nelson says he had no idea Sheila was
married yeah so I’m saying she was
married they were having an affair but
he didn’t know she was married
yes so it’s not like he’s admitting to
having an affair okay I did it Sheila I
know her and they’re like all you know
she was married at the time and he’s
like are you talking about and so you
would think is he lying you know but the
truth is and this is very odd for this
year she would go to his house but he
would also stay with her on weekends and
stay overnight at her shared home with
Paul at various times and this is how
Sheila did this Sheila would tell Paul
that she had a mentally ill brother
which was true and that he needed to
stay with Sheila at times but would
react very badly if he knew that she had
gotten married and so she needed time
with her brother alone oh god I’m not
even kidding
and so Paul would leave the marital
residence during those times and go to a
hotel or stay with friends well he
thought this was a little strange he
said I don’t know I thought it was weird
yes but I was trying to be a supportive
husband if she has his brother with a
serious mental illness and he can’t
handle another man in the house or maybe
you know what it is I just was being the
good husband and she would literally
purge the house then she would go
through and take all the photos down and
make crazy this is a crazy I mean this
is crazy we’ve heard of people having
affairs but never in this way why not
just get a hotel room because well the
argument here would obviously have that
he would say why can’t I go to your
house yes but it also I mean this has to
be a marker as well why not just spend
more time at his house why not make up
an excuse that you’re mentally ill
brother lives at your house yeah why
have your husband leave so weird and
manipulate the situation she get away
with that crazy but that and why so so
the question is why do that what does it
say you know we talk about people who
like to push the envelope and like to be
smarter in control or I don’t know if
you can look at this as being indicative
of what type of personality she has
because they’re like you said what do
you mean what personality disorder she
has more of the yeah okay so this is how
she had this affair with Nelson the
police were obviously floored by the
information and they’re floored again
that Nelson is saying no I stayed with
her and this is what he said look she
did not have asthma I stayed at her
house and they’re like no no she did and
then she later revealed how she would
trick Nelson so Sheila decided you know
they arrested Sheila clearly and she
took her case to trial and she used the
defense of mental illness and she
claimed that she had a dissociative
episode in that moment and it stemmed
from PTSD from the years of growing up
in a war zone in Iran in the s an ax
t I guess that would be yeah that she’s
not saying I’m insane it was just like I
had a an episode definitely temporary
yes and again she’s just saying look
I’ve been subjected to such violence and
there are times when I’ve been triggered
and snapped
I snapped at this moment so was she on
trial for stabbing the two times because
I would wonder if she’s also using
self-defense or were they only charging
her with that first stabbing right cuz
she stabbed him twice but she’s giving a
different excuse for each she is giving
a different excuse and both excuses
would come into play at trial okay so
she initially explained one as a
dissociative disorder and the second one
as you know she explained that later on
as an episode kind of of what she
thought like self-defense but I’m not
sure now that I think back if maybe at
trial she didn’t just say that she you
know snapped it’s easier for her just a
together yeah I have to I would have to
look back to see if she used that as the
same excuse but she definitely later on
and in her interview said that the
second time was confused we were
fighting and I feel like he was going to
try to hurt me and in an interview I saw
she all of a sudden so she did an
interview also with Piers Morgan you
know he doesn’t kill her yet women show
she all of a sudden pulls out this
explanation that well Paul had a history
of also hitting me at times and you know
there was there was some violence that
we chose not to discuss this was
completely new information in Piers
Morgan is like Ivan we’ve never heard
this before he went back and then
questioned the police officers everyone
this never came out at trial
this was never brought in in during the
investigation this is a completely new
assertion by Sheila Davaloo in one of
her first interviews okay a lie I mean
I’m gonna go it this is a clear line
yeah I think so and people also describe
Paul as the sweetest teddy bear this is
the guy who leaves because he’s trying
to be considerate I mean I think this
was also a lie now here’s what’s
surprising Paul is called to the witness
stand of course during Sheila’s trial
he’s the victim but he defends Sheila he
comes to her aid saying that he also
agreed like his wife was not violent
towards him he believed that she had
some type of episode that she snapped
and that he did not blame her for what
happened you know I think it was a
surprise because he’s the victim but he
was extremely supportive so he testified
further defense he had to testify for
the prosecution because he he is the
witness and as the
victim but in doing so he also came to
her eight so I mean he’s a prosecution
witness who was also favorable did they
ask him about the situation in the
parking lot over the hospital like I
wonder if his story was the same that
they got into a struggle or whether or
not no they asked him and they did ask
him and he just said that she stabbed me
again okay he denied that there was that
he did not tell that struggle no he did
not
okay so Paul takes the stand Sheila
you know has a full trial did she take
the stand she did not take the stand
okay and the outcome here is that Sheila
was found guilty of attempted murder and
sentenced to years with no
possibility of early parole
this was the harshest pass sentence this
was the harshest possible sentence she
could have received for the crime Wow
now it’s interesting because maybe some
thought this was the end of the story
but given what they found out about
Sheila and Nelson the police thought
that perhaps this wasn’t Sheila’s first
attempt at murder so there is actually
more to this story a lot more to this
story okay and I wanted to go back
because you we also said that this was
the harshest possible sentence which was
true so there are two things about this
at her sentencing Paul again came to her
aid and advocated and asked for a lesser
sentence yeah but and then one step even
more shocking Paul’s family came to her
sentencing his family and also asked for
a lesser sentence for her saying that
they loved her she was a great
daughter-in-law do they have kids
no no they also I thought this was
interesting because they knew at this
point that she was having an affair for
so long but they still came to her aid
and even we didn’t have any priors right
that’s a harsh sentence to not have
victim impact statements and no priors
and it was a woman harsh sentence so in
one of the interview she did she said
the same thing she’s like well I totally
understand why I was given you know I
fully expected to be given a long prison
sentence she’s like but I didn’t expect
to be given the harshest sentence I
think there are people who’ve committed
murders where someone actually
died and they’re given less time which
is very true so I I agree years is
harsh but then you have to look at it
this way she stabbed him twice and he
very well could have died yeah she
wanted him to die it seems well did she
or didn’t she that becomes one of the
key questions so we have this question
but regardless she look at years
she’s not gonna be given parole and this
time is to be served in New York so is
that the end of the story no it’s not so
the police learn about this connection
now with Sheila and Nelson and they
wonder I does this have anything to do
with another case of a murder of a woman
named Anna Lisa Raymundo so who is
annalisa and how does she connect to
this case okay Anna Lisa also worked at
Purdue Pharma with Nelson and with
Sheila Anna Lisa was smart beautiful
young graduate from Harvard she was
working in pharmaceutical research for
the company she was also the woman
Nelson Sessler was dating around the
same time as Sheila and he left Sheila
for her and pretty quickly after they
began dating she and Nelson became
engaged so now Sheila is the one on the
outs here so Nelson and Anna Lisa are
moving their relationship forward
and I’m sorry this all happened prior to
the stabbing of her husband correct I
think so this is all in and I’ll give
you the dates but this is all we’re
talking about a timeframe in when
she stabbed her husband in okay so
she and Nelson become engaged but not
too long after Nelson broke it off with
Sheila because there’s some overlap
between annalisa and Sheila Anna Lisa
was stabbed to death in her home a
brutal stabbing and I mean we just you
know yeah we’ve been covering some of
these but it was it was very brutal and
she was also bludgeoned in the back of
her skull and I did see some of the
photos from the crime scene because I
was watching this episode of was it
snapped or Piers Morgan so I saw some of
the crime scenes there’s a lot of blood
the blood went outside the home on the
staircase so she’s bludgeoned in the
back of the skull there was a female
who said in a very like convoluted voice
that she thought a man
was attacking her neighbor like it was
kind of a call where she goes
there’s a man he’s attacking my neighbor
and it really was it was muffled it was
an odd way and she provided an address
for the attack but then she also gave
several different addresses changing the
address like three times or something
like that but it was enough information
for police officers to fine Annalise’s
condo and obviously to find this brutal
and she was at home by herself yes she
was and and her murder took place sorry
I should have said before the murder
took place on November th who who
was the caller did they ever find out ah
this is going to become a very
interesting part of the story so it was
the only thing they could determine at
that time because the caller didn’t
leave a name was that it was absolutely
a female so that’s it how so it was
clearly Sheila well anything you smart
cookie you was it or wasn’t it that is
gonna come into play but that’s probably
the initial thought so well that was
nice of her well was it nice of her
because there’s they say the reason she
actually called and said it was a man
attacking was to take any focus off
anybody thought they saw a woman but
we’ll get into that
Amy stealing my thunder cuz she’s smart
okay so Nelson was initially the suspect
of course because who’s gonna be the
suspect of a vicious stabbing a personal
crime as we’ve talked about in the home
it’s going to be the person closest but
what happened was that they were able to
confirm pretty quickly that he was
working during the time of Anna Lisa’s
murder and so they turned to Sheila
Davaloo and it took some time to build
their case but they did wind up charging
her with murder but she wasn’t for five
or six years so she would have gotten
away with that if she never stamped her
husband yes interesting this is this is
where we get we’re gonna go off so
here’s what’s happening okay so Sheila
was charged for the murder of Anna Lisa
Raymundo five to six years after Anna
Lisa’s murder but the cops were they
were moving slowly they had some
evidence they were trying to piece
together they knew they didn’t have to
rush because guess what
Sheila’s serving the sentence already of
years and she’s in Bedford Hills
Correctional Facility in New York and so
they’re not
ruch because she’s not going anywhere
right so they were criticized for taking
so long
but they said luckily we understand that
criticism we didn’t come to her exactly
right away we were working also with
another police department and we wanted
to have the best case possible you may
knew they had the time exactly so what’s
the rush okay so Sheila is charged with
the murder and Sheila decides to do
something very interesting at her trial
she decides to represent herself you
know the saying right the the person who
the person who represents himself has a
fool for a client is that it sounds
right sounds Bernie who represents
himself as a fool yeah but it should be
have you encountered or have you had any
cases that you’ve been really like done
the deep dive on where someone
represented them no no because no one’s
that foolish well what she said was that
you know what I didn’t do so well the
last time around so she’s claiming she’s
innocent of this stabbing oh yeah yeah
no she’s she’s claiming full-on
innocence and I’m gonna talk about the
evidence against her and what happened
at trial so on January th the
criminal case against Sheila commenced
and she again was representing herself
so let’s talk about some of the evidence
so first there’s the — call which
did not come from a neighbor rather it
came from a location that was blocks
away so initially it was someone who
said I’m her I’m a neighbor and I can
see a man so they find that no that came
from blocks away and they canvassed the
neighborhood by the way door-to-door put
out flyers everything could not find the
caller all right we’ll come back to that
and then there’s the ace in the hole
the call is you know indicative but
here’s the ace in the hole a forensic
analysis found one spot of blood in Anna
Lisa’s bathroom sink that did not belong
to annalisa
so here’s your DNA link because it turns
out that that DNA belonged to Sheila
Davaloo and she’s gonna still claim
she’s innocent oh she sure is can she
explain how that blood got there well
she’s gonna try so I’m gonna give you
her explanation so Westchester
detectives went to Stanford police to
work together because Anna Lisa’s crime
happened in Stamford Sheila Davaloo was
convicted of Paul’s case in Westchester
and when the Westchester police heard
the they were like that’s Sheila
Davaloo
we know we’ve been working with her you
know what I mean like we know exactly
who that is yeah but that’s not
scientific no it’s not also on the day
annalisa was murdered Sheila left around
lunch and took a very long lunch break
around the time of the murder what are
you thinking so far it doesn’t look good
Paul her first husband is also a witness
at this trial and he tells a really
interesting story that his wife so
Sheila had been telling him about some
work drama and the work drama that she
had been telling him was of a love
triangle at work and it was a man named
Jack was choosing a woman named annalisa
over a woman named Melissa oh okay so
it’s a story that she’s telling of a
love triangle that involves her and and
Nelson and annalisa but she’s telling it
to her husband they didn’t say together
when she got incarcerated and out did
they know so Paul is telling the court
about this and people are going okay
Paul also told the court about these you
know weekend trips that he had to take
and he told the court house Sheila
stabbed him so Nelson also testifies
because he’s a central figure here he is
the one that this is supposedly all for
right so they said that she stabbed her
husband because she wanted to get rid of
him and they weren’t allowed well they
were also allowed to use that crime in
trial because it was relevant yes it was
relevant so they were allowed to use it
so Nelson testifies about how Sheila
deceived him how he had no idea about
the marriage he also stated that he was
ending his relationship with Sheila when
he and annalisa got more serious but
after the murder he started to see
Sheila again because he didn’t have any
idea nobody knew right away that Sheila
had killed annalisa and so Sheila comes
in and what did they think it was just a
random they had no idea they had no
evidence and they they didn’t have I
don’t know if they had suspects but they
had no proof it wasn’t until Sheila
stabbed her husband that they had any
idea of what happened so for them for a
tying that was together I thought it was
a great tie together so it’s kind of
sick if you think about it cuz Sheila
comes in and they start seeing each
other and she’s like comforting Nelson
like you lost you know I’m
that you all said only sounds like we
have a sociopath on our hey yeah I want
to be here for you and and what not and
so yeah we’re getting into a kind of an
icky realm here so at trial there was a
voice analysis expert who said it was
Sheila’s voice on the tape but we
know that this is not an exact science
is it the voice analysis is that it’s
not a junk science is it or is it just
not an exact you know I don’t think it’s
been classified as a junk sighs I don’t
think it’s used often enough you know
what I mean like I don’t think it’s made
it into that category not like there’s a
criteria to be quote-unquote junk
science but it’s not common right no
it’s not common Emily not validated it’s
not validated I just I didn’t think it
was a junk science but it’s not exact
science
and this isn’t conclusive evidence
because there were also people who came
in and said that they didn’t think it
sounded like Sheila so of course I’ve
listened like a hundred times and I
think it sounds like Sheila yeah so
Piers Morgan goes like I feel like
that’s you and later on the jury when
they did an interview said that Sheila
they might not have had an opinion about
it had Sheila not represented herself
because they got to hear her voice
throughout the trial hahaha he just
keeps nailing her own coffin shut kind
of okay so Sheila disputes the DNA at
trial saying that it was the only piece
of evidence to be resubmitted to the
laboratory so what she’s saying is that
it actually left the crime lab at some
point and was returned later
so she’s arguing that it was
contaminated so she thinks it was a
setup
why did she think that police are trying
to she did it so here’s interested she’s
not arguing is a setup she’s arguing
that somehow because it left well no she
does imply that yes it would be both her
i contaminated but who would
contaminated it probable she’s like why
is that why did that ever leave the
crime lab which is an interesting
question I haven’t heard I was gonna say
what’s the answer did they do a
cross-examination on a witness on that I
don’t know what the answer is I don’t
recall seeing what the answer was to be
honest so she says that it left the lab
it’s probably cross or is it
cross-contamination no it’s contaminated
watch she questions why would this be
the only piece of evidence to you know
leave the lab she’s like obviously
because it
the most damning piece but then she also
says and I’m not sure said at trial but
she did say in the interview that she
was actually at Anna Lisa’s house once
for a housewarming party which way long
before there was a year oh come on
people clean their bathrooms they
certainly didn’t look she actually said
that I was there but I didn’t even go in
that bathroom she’s not even helping
herself saying thank you very much
but she’s arguing again that there’s
this issue of contamination and that
yeah I think she is implying that there
is some type of setup here why would
they have taken that out so what happens
she defends herself
I watched she’s a smart woman just so
you know she’s not I mean you know she
seemingly made a lot of dumb moves but
she doesn’t come across that way I
wouldn’t say she was you know the best
attorney but I also wouldn’t say she
came across as the worst she had some
interesting points you know but in the
end on February th the jury found
Sheila guilty of murder and sentenced
her to years in prison to begin after
her year sentence in New York is
complete so essentially that’s a -year
sentence combined and like I said one of
the jurors said the strongest piece of
evidence against her was her voice yes
because they heard her so what happens
now okay Sheila’s convicted Sheila’s
still maintains her innocence and is
confident that she will be exonerated
so she maintains her innocence for
Annalise’s stabbing she maintains her
innocence for Anna Lisa’s murder but
remember in the beginning I said this
woman claims she is guilty for a vicious
crime because she says she assumes
responsibility she assumes
responsibility for the stabbing of her
husband saying that she wasn’t trying to
kill him but she definitely stabbed him
she was wrong she doesn’t know what
happened she deserves to be punished
so yes on one no on the other so she’s
given two recent interviews one was
unsnapped and one on deadly women with
Piers Morgan and these are the first two
interviews that she’s ever done but is
this the end of the story I’m assuming
not fine
so in police visit Sheila again to
ask about the murder of a woman named
Nancy Smith who was also a former
coworker of sheila davaloo’s at Purdue
Pharma well either way it’s just
interesting that people around her keep
dying yes it is the murder happened
about a year prior to Anna Lisa’s murder
on December th and the year old
Nancy was stabbed to death in her home
who was she dating so police go in and
they’re investigating this crime and one
of the things they saw at the crime
scene other than this poor bludgeoned
woman was a calendar and on her calendar
on one of the dates there was a
reference to Nelson comma CT like Nelson
Connecticut and so the police thought
here it is oh my god this woman must
have dated Nelson at some point as well
and maybe this thing with Nelson was
actually going on a lot before they
think they found this I’m assuming they
called Nelson they were like hey you
know this check of course if he says no
okay and so you know and it doesn’t want
to be involved in this crazy scenario
anymore and is trying to move on with
his life and obviously was pretty
traumatized as well but so they actually
find out it turns out that Nelson
Connecticut was a band that Nancy was
going to see a show for do you remember
the group no of course yeah I can’t live
without you I’m not gonna sing but so it
turns out that that was actually a
reference just to the band that she was
having so funny police went to visit
Sheila and Sheila said she had no idea
who Nancy was she didn’t recognize her
at all they’re like well you work
together she’s like we worked at a huge
company I didn’t never ran into this
woman I don’t know this woman Nelson
says that he didn’t know her and so
after investigating the case the DNA
also did not match Sheila so the police
and the end could not find a link
although they are not convinced that
that means that Sheila is it were they
able to confirm that Nelson was in fact
in Connecticut on that date I mean the
band’s Nelson that’s done no they were
it’s a silly coincidence but it is kind
of I mean it is so why wouldn’t Elson
lie and say he didn’t know her no they
don’t don’t hide yeah they just think
what
what we’re thinking is that it’s still a
little bit odd right that this woman you
know death keeps happening around this
yeah yeah okay so that is the end of her
story there’s no connection there so you
know I watched her on on these episodes
and she is proclaiming her innocence
says that she’s working on her case so I
guess we should get to our opinions here
Amy you want me to go first sure all
right so I think that Sheila is guilty
of both crimes and I think that she has
been appropriately sentenced for the
second crime as we just discussed I
think that years was probably a
little too harsh given that they didn’t
know what else was going on so just on
the on the surface she was she did
receive the harshest sentence and I have
to wonder if part of the reason was what
we’ve talked about with women who looked
bad because they’re having an affair so
was the sentence harsh because it was
just about the crime or was it also
because she’s a bad woman right she’s
she’s suffering the gender stereotype
given what I know now I’m sure it’s a
very appropriate sentence but it seems a
little bit harsh on the on the face how
about you I agree with you on both
points I think she is guilty guilty
guilty okay and you but you agree
years yes you seemed a little surprised
by that well I think to life is harsh
for most people you know I think we over
incarcerate in over sentence people
generally in our country especially for
not even if it’s attempted murder I mean
maybe have on the back end you
know let her be eligible for parole some
times before that let’s give this woman
a chance as it turns out she’s not
someone who needs to be who needs to be
in society clearly but looking at just
the facts of that case I think that’s a
very harsh sentence I don’t find here’s
a problem I can’t say that I don’t find
Sheila totally intriguing no I am not
sure why you know that we get stuck on
certain cases when I watched the
episodes I found myself a little
mesmerised she is truly confident I mean
truly well-spoken and she is so adamant
about her wrongful conviction
that you almost believe her I had a
similar feeling too when not not
Melanie’s case I know I’m gonna always
reference Melanie’s case but I actually
had a similar feeling to watching her as
when I watched the interrogation or one
of the initial interrogations of Jodi
arias and Jodi arias if you didn’t know
she was lying
you wouldn’t know she was lying at she
was so good she was so convincing she
was so that just shows us how bad we can
judge people’s truthfulness you can’t
you know we’re not we’re not good at
that as humans so what I would really
love to do I couldn’t help at the get
Sheila on the show hi you’re laughing so
actually what I was getting out okay I
would love to have a conversation with
Sheila Davaloo in which I could
challenge her on some of these issues
call her right so Sheila is in Bedford
Hills she’s a local case she’s obviously
open now to doing some interviews but I
also thought of her and I know you’re
probably gonna shake your head but I
also thought of her for direct appeal
because she is filing her she’s in the
appeals process now and she adamantly
maintains that she did not kill annalisa
and that she can provide some proof or
some reasonable doubt as to why she did
not and she’s looking for you know to
tell her story and for someone to
believe her let’s do it we have nothing
else going on so Amy and I are for
people who listen to direct appeal Amy
and I are considering cases for season
two and I have one other case that I
would love to do but the woman has not
yet agreed to participate so we’ll wait
on that one but this one is my second
one of interest so if Sheila or anyone
else is listening who knows Sheila
please have her reach out you just reach
out to her Meghan okay you know what
done I’m gonna give her a call
we’ll update everyone and that’s
everything that we have for today so
thank you so much for listening thank
you Amy Thank You Meghan we’ll see you
all next time on women and crime
[Music]
women and crime is written and hosted by
Meghan sacks and Amy schlosberg our
producer and editor is James Varga our
music is composed by dessert media
sources for today’s episode I used
included an episode of snapped killer
women with Piers Morgan and articles
from the Stanford Advocate