
2024-07-05 00:33:11
Twelve-year-old McKay Everett disappeared from his Texas home in September 1995. His father Carl returned from an Amway meeting to find the back door ajar and the telephone ringing. On the line, a woman with a raspy voice demanded $500,000. Over the next week, the FBI played a game of cat-and-mouse with the kidnappers, who used inside information to stay one step ahead of the investigation. Ultimately the FBI uncovered a series of crimes that started long before McKay was taken. Most shocking of all was the suspect. McKay had been betrayed by someone he trusted – a pillar of the community hiding a dark secret. But decades later, McKay’s mother, Paulette, still isn’t satisfied with the official story. She doesn’t think everyone involved has been brought to justice. Ransom: Season 1 - Position of Trust is a story of greed and betrayal and how one’s outward appearance can be dangerously deceiving.
Mike Graczyk is a former reporter for the Associated Press who covered the McKay-Everett kidnapping, Hilton Crawford's trial, and Hilton's execution. And as a reporter who spent 40 years based out of Huntsville, the city that houses Texas's death row and execution chamber, he has another distinction. He's witnessed more executions than anyone else in the country.
I've watched probably 450 as we sit here.
And you said that Texas had done one before you started reporting here. So what happened there? They stopped for a while or?
The Supreme Court in the mid-60s put a moratorium on capital punishment in the whole country. And that moratorium lasted for about a decade until the mid-70s when they decided that capital punishment could resume. And then Texas carried out the first one in 82.. That was the very first lethal injection, also in the country. And since then, Texas has certainly gained the notoriety as the most active state for capital punishment.
And were you saying you kind of had an interest in this topic even before you started covering it?
No. I came from Michigan, which never had the death penalty. There has never been an execution carried out by the state of Michigan. Never. And I think the only one that ever occurred there was at the federal level.
But I think as long as Michigan has been a state, they have not recognized the capital punishment. So, coming to Texas, this was all very new to me.
And do you remember the first capital punishment case you covered or witnessed?
Absolutely. J.D. Cowboy, Autry. And what was notable about that one is that we went in there to cover the execution. And they used to do them at midnight here.
And it got to be just before midnight. They took those of us reporters who were to be witnesses into the area where the chamber is. And the Supreme Court stopped it, like at quarter to midnight. And we all walked back. Then, several months later, after the appeals had been resolved, then we went in there and did it again.
I remember his eyes remaining open or his eyes closed, and then they popped open for whatever reason, after he clearly was unconscious and then dead. Muscle relaxation or whatever.
So that first one you witnessed, was that the second lethal injection that they'd done here in Texas?
Yes. That was the second one. James David Autry, I believe, is what his name was, but everybody called him Cowboy. And it's one of the questions I have always asked inmates when I interview them is, what do they call you around here? For Hilton Crawford, they called him the old man because at that time he was, I think, the second oldest person on death row in Texas.
So all of his younger cohorts, or all the other people on the road, called him the old man.
Yeah. So I guess, do you remember when you did first hear about the McKay-Everett case?
I was here in Houston covering whatever goes on. And the story came in on TV or the news that there was an abduction in Conroe, Texas. Authorities were looking for a 12-year-old boy who was taken from his home in Conroe. And I remember going out to the Everett home in Conroe where they held a news conference and his parents pleaded for assistance and for the return of their son. So yeah, I remember that.
And then certainly the devastating news that came, what, a few days later, that they had a person in custody and that that person had pointed authorities to a swamp in Louisiana where they found the remains of the child.
And did it turn into a national story at some point?
Yes, it did. The story became national. Certainly, when a 12-year-old gets abducted, it becomes big news, becomes bigger news when he's found, becomes bigger news when the person arrested for it is a family friend.
When you were talking about nicknames before, I thought you were going to bring up the Uncle Hilty.
Yeah, Uncle Hilty would be the name that would be forever associated with the case. But on death row, he wasn't known as Uncle Hilty. He was known as the Old Man.
I guess, what do you remember about kind of covering the case?
Story unfolded. There were the usual pretrial hearings. I remember getting subpoenaed along with other reporters. And I think it had to do with the change of venue request. They wanted the case moved out of Conroe.
The defense did. And subsequently was, but it wasn't moved far. It was moved to the next county directly north. So it was moved about 30 miles, essentially.
So it's out there trying to figure out how much coverage the case had released, so what the likelihood that the jury would have had. Correct.
Correct. The defense is looking for jurors who would not have heard of or known of particulars of the case. And they're trying to get jurors who are totally, I don't want to say ignorant, but don't know anything about the case itself, so that they would not have a preconceived idea or notion or attitude that Hilton Crawford was guilty of this. They want somebody who has an open mind about it. And that was their goal in getting a change of venue.
I was surprised that it was moved so close, in that it's the same media market. Conroe or Huntsville still gets its news primarily from Houston. But it is what it is, and that's where it was moved.
Is it something where it's kind of like in the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law?
I guess. I don't know if I'd go there, but somebody, I think, could make that sort of assessment sure. And I covered the trial that was held at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville in the ceremonial or student, whatever you want to call it, courtroom. there. It's kind of an amphitheater that is made up to look like a courtroom.
And all the details came out, and that Crawford was deeply in debt, and he claimed to have mobsters or folks who were demanding money from him, and he didn't have it. That's what they were trying to convince the jurors, that that was the evidence. And they had some physical evidence that tied him to the scene. And in fact, he said that he was there at the site where McKay was killed, but that he did not participate, and that there was this mysterious, what's his name, Remington, R.L. Remington, it seems to ring a bell.
And they tracked down a gentleman who matched the sketch that he described or that was made from his description, but it certainly wasn't R.
L. Remington, and was clearly not involved in the case, and could account for his whereabouts when this is all taking place.
Was this a thing where, in court, they held up the sketch next to the guy to kind of show the likeness between them? Does that ring any bell?
That's probably, yeah. Probably, yeah.
Yeah, were there any kind of, when you think back about it, are there any moments from the trial that come to mind?
McKay's mother's meltdown, I mean, she just, she lost it. I remember it was very, very uncomfortable, but I do know she came back a couple weeks later to give a victim impact statement, and she was very collected and calm and did what she needed to do at that point, but I just remember her wailing. She was just beyond being comforted, and I think somebody escorted her out of the building or out of the courtroom there, but it was very, very unsettling.
Did you ever interview Paulette or Carl directly?
Certainly talked to Paulette or Carl at the news conference that they initially had. Once the case got underway, there was a gag order. I think I talked to her as the execution got close years later, and then afterwards, I think we talked with her in a group setting once the execution had taken place.
How would you describe her?
Passionate, devastating.
And if you know the history of the case, you know that she never thought she'd be able to have her own children, and McKay was kind of a miracle baby, it turned out, and grew up, and they were very close, and they were stuck like glue to one another. And to lose someone, I can't imagine that. I mean, if you have kids of your own, you understand just how devastating it would be, and you hope you never have to go through it, and she did.
So I think she was very sincere in what she was trying to do with the foundation, but I think passionate and devastated. Simple words to describe her, that's all I would put it.
What about Carl?
I don't know. I didn't have much dealings with him. I know he didn't show up for the execution. I looked back and reviewed some of the stories I wrote, and I didn't see that I quoted him in the stories post-trial, so I don't think I ever talked to him. Once.
we had the mom, and she was such a central figure in the story, you only have so much space or so much time, so if you've got what we call good quotes, good comments from at least the mom, I don't want to say there's no need to talk to the dad, but.
They kind of fill the same place in the story.
Yeah, yeah. And you're going to, as an editor, when you go through your material, you're going to take the best stuff, and all that stuff was really good about a bad situation, but no, I don't recall talking to Carl.
What about Hilton Crawford or his family?
Talked to Hilton Crawford a number of times on death row. I don't think I ever talked to his wife, Connie, when the story first broke and he got arrested. I don't know if I talked to them, but some of my colleagues talked to some of his former colleagues about his background as a law enforcement officer and ran a security firm of his own, I think, and then sold the company and claimed that the people who bought it, I guess, didn't pay him or something or other, there were all kinds of financial irregularities involved in that, which, if you believe, Hilton Crawford, got us to the point where we're at, with McKay being abducted and the ransom demand.
Yeah. I guess he claimed there was kind of, like other people, embezzling, but then...
He told me it was people from Chicago who were all over him to get money, but I guess he was described as being a pretty active gambler, pretty heavy gambler. He claimed that he got in over his head on credit card debt because he was trying to buy all this stuff that his kids wanted and he didn't want to be a bad father or a bad provider for his family and got into six-figure debt plus whatever. the Chicago guys were squeezing him on, if you believe all that. But that's, yeah, I talked to Hilton Crawford at least two or three times in prison. He used to send me Christmas cards, wrote me letters.
Kind of weird.
I mean, I guess you've covered a lot of cases like this, so how did he compare to kind of other people in that same situation?
Clearly, Hilton Crawford was older than the typical prisoner that you see arrive on death row. You don't get people in their 50s being sentenced to death. But soft-spoken, didn't really refuse to answer questions. He kind of dodged around them or he had an explanation that, as a reporter, you've got your skeptical ears open and if something doesn't sound right, you ask him, follow-up says, well, can you explain that for me? Or this doesn't sound right, how can this be?
And then you come up with some other explanation and you take everything with a grain of salt. Our earlier conversations, he was very hopeful about either getting a new trial or getting out or having at least reduced to a life prison term. I think that was the goal in the trial. They presented no defense witnesses at his trial. And that means to me that they conceded he was guilty, guilty of something, and that they were going to try to save his life as opposed to try to have him found innocent.
Well, they lost on the guilt, innocence, and then they lost on the sentencing because of the nature of the crime. And the jurors don't like that.
Yeah, I guess it was kind of like he was saying, I did kidnap him, but I didn't murder him.
I was there, I did kidnap him, I was there when he was attacked, but I didn't do it. I wasn't involved. And I remember asking him flat out, why did you stop it if you weren't involved? And he said, well, I should have. I wish I had.
I wish I could turn back the clock, but it wasn't me. And he, I mean, he said that, I think he said that to the end, the very, very last statement.
In general, was he kind of consistent with his story, or did it feel like it bounced around when you talked to him?
No, Hilton Crawford was pretty consistent. My theory on that is that these people who are locked up, I'm pretty convinced they could pass a polygraph. All they have is time. You're locked in a six by nine concrete cell and all you have is time to convince yourself that I didn't do it, I wasn't there. In so many of these cases, you can go fall back, and I would ask them, well, were you on drugs?
Is it possible? you did it and you just don't remember? And a lot of times they'll say, yeah, I don't remember doing it. So I didn't do it. I wasn't there.
Even though DNA or physical evidence or whatever will indicate that, yeah, they're responsible for it. In Hilton Crawford's case, though, I don't think there was any drug use. So you couldn't use as an explanation that he was high on drugs or some sort of out of body experience, because he said he was there. But I think people can convince themselves that I didn't do it.
It almost feels like it's a plan that someone would come up with on drugs or something like that. I guess I've wondered sometimes if maybe gambling addiction is more powerful than I think and it resembles things that we'd be more familiar with or more accepting of if it was drug addiction.
Yes. Yes.
That wasn't a question. But do you know what I mean? Or do you have any thoughts about how the gambling addiction angle kind of played into it?
I don't know. I don't know. One of the things I've come up with over the years is you never get surprised by the carnage that people are able to do and either have no regrets or a few regrets or regrets if they just were caught. I have yet to meet any person that acknowledges their crime who said that I knew I was going to get caught, but I did it anyway. I think that therein lies the rub and that if you didn't think you were going to be caught, then that gives you the green light to go ahead and do it.
But unfortunately, history tells us that the chances of getting caught by doing something like Hilton Crawford did are pretty good. You leave a trail.
I know he said that they never proved that he pulled the trigger and it was a circumstantial case. Well, the circumstances were pretty strong in his case, with the car and the floor mat.
There was blood on his clothes.
Yeah, yeah.
I don't know that it was an open and shut case, but it was a pretty strong one. And the fact that they didn't mount any defense in the guilt-and-innocence phase of the trial is kind of a testament to that, that it was a strong case.
After the break, Gracek discusses Hilton Crawford's execution.
Do you remember Crawford's execution? I know you said you were going to look up your notes, but was it something that you remembered before looking that stuff up?
No, I did not.
When Paulette was remembering it, one of the details that stuck out to her was all the leather straps. She said it looked like Frankenstein's monster or something. She wondered if that was a little bit theatrical. What is he going to do? Pop up off the table or something?
You've seen a lot of these.
There have been a couple instances where inmates have tried to wriggle out of the restraints. So, yes, they do need to take as much precaution as possible. If those restraints are needed, I guess we can look at it in the reverse. Let's say that an inmate gets put on there and breaks off the restraints. Can you imagine the fallout that would occur?
These stupid Texans, they don't know. Why couldn't they have anticipated this? Why didn't they take the proper precautions? They're intended to keep someone secure. I mean, given a life or death situation, you can imagine the amount of strength that someone could gather to try to get out of this.
And so they need that.
Do a lot of people kind of panic in those final moments?
No. I credit the chaplains that the TDCJ employs for calming inmates and for keeping a pretty serene environment. There have been outbursts, but they're few and far between.
I think some people involved were wondering whether there would be kind of, he would confess to the murder itself, but he kind of maintained that R.
L. Remington was somewhere out there kind of up until the end. Is that something that ever happens, that you have seen, that someone will kind of choose that as the moment to finally confess and apologize?
There have been a lot of apologies given from the death chamber. It's pretty rare for someone to completely do a 180 and decide, after years and years of saying, I didn't do it, I didn't do it, I didn't do it, then to acknowledge, yeah, I did it. That's real unusual. I bet you. I could count on my fingers the times that has happened.
They either have acknowledged it beforehand and they're sorry for it, or you've got the wrong person, I'm innocent, you're killing the wrong person.
Paulette, one of the things she remembers is they told her she couldn't say anything, but then, kind of next door, in the other room, there were these monks chanting the whole time.
Yeah, they tell the victims that you really shouldn't say anything. I can't remember being in there. If people say anything, I don't know that they've, it's very rare where someone will talk to an inmate on the victim's side or just burst out.
Usually it's more emotional for the perpetrator's side?
Yeah, and that surprised me. initially. Victim survivors were not always allowed in the chamber. It wasn't until the late 1990s. And I thought when they opened it up to those folks that we would see more emotion into that.
But I think the prison officials brief these folks before they go in. And I think they tell them, you've got to maintain your demeanor. And for the most part, 99% of the time, they are all stoic. On the other side, yeah, we've seen a whole lot more emotion from people who are either friends or relatives of the inmate. And it can get pretty uncomfortable.
in there. A mother watches her son dying and she hits the floor at your feet and is writhing after her son was gasping and then went unconscious and she lost it. But we've had other people beating on the walls. And there's one instance where somebody kicked the wall, put his foot through the wall. I mean, they've had to take people out of the room and just take them outside in a courtyard because it was getting out of control.
But on the side with the victims, it's been pretty calm.
Yeah, I think they told Paulette, like, you know, if you act up, that could cost other victims this opportunity or something like that.
That's a pretty good explanation. That's probably true.
And do they stagger the witnesses coming in so they don't like bump into each other in the parking lot or something?
Yes. The timing of it is such that the two sides never are intended to see one another, just in case there's animosity or they're trying to mitigate any sort of potential problem. Reporters like me were the last people into the room. So sometimes you're stuck at the very back. It's difficult to see.
There are jail bars on the glass wall. that separates you as a witness from the inmate. I've been on the side where the inmate witnesses are, and very often to show their support for their loved one, the inmate, people will put their hands up on the glass, on the plexiglass, and keep it there for the duration of the execution. And typically the condensation from your hands will collect on the glass and it'll form kind of a fog so that when they turn to leave after it's done, what you see on the glass are these images of handprints. And then, if you stay in there long enough, they start to fade away.
It's a very powerful image.
Sort of eerie? Yeah.
Yeah. I think that the prison system, with all of its faults, and there have been a lot of criticisms of it, they do a very good job of carrying out the punishments in a dignified and respectful way. I was talking to a group once and I got in all kinds of trouble by defining that such, and the people who were opposed to the capital punishment decided that there was nothing dignified about this and nothing respectful about this. And for me to characterize it in that fashion was just flat out wrong. But, you know, the fact of it is, there's no joking around.
There's no fooling around. There's nobody laughing and grinning and whatever. It's all business. You can't please everyone. all the time.
There is a sentiment that maybe the death penalty isn't the right direction to go. And if you look and see the number of states that have decided to drop capital punishment, there are certainly fewer states now than there were in the past. But that pendulum moves back and forth, I think. If you look historically in the 40s, 50s, and we get to the 60s, where the death penalty was carried out a whole lot in the 40s and 50s, and then it started slowing down in the 60s until it was stopped. And then a period went by and the court says, well, it's okay to do it again.
And it started off very slowly. and we have this classic kind of parabola where Texas does 40 in a year back in 2000.. And the pendulum now has swung back so that there aren't as many. There are other options for jurors, and the big one in Texas here has been that jurors can decide not only on death penalty, but also sentence the person to life without parole. And I think that's put a big dent in capital punishment here.
Whether the increase in crime that everyone is kind of focusing on these days, whether that will tend to push the pendulum back in the other direction, now remains to be seen. But historically, it goes back and forth, back and forth.
And then I guess, kind of going back to some of the stuff we were talking about at the beginning, in terms of kind of your unique experience, having witnessed all these. I mean, do you know, like, are you the person in the U.S. that's witnessed the most executions, or something like that?
If someone in the U.
S. has seen more executions than I have, I don't know where they would be. Texas has carried out more executions than any other state and I've covered most of them here. So that's the only other option, I guess, would be if someone. I know that in the Middle East or China, they do them in mass.
I mean, just, you know, 20, 30 at a time. But in the U.S. certainly, no, I don't think anyone has seen more than I have. It's a notoriety that I have not taken any great pleasure in, but it's not something that I shy away from. Curiously, to me.
at least, other reporters want to know that, other news reporters. And well, how many have you done?
And a lot of times. my response is, well, how many murder scenes have you been to? How many plane crashes? How many hurricanes have you covered? It's the same thing.
It's just what I have done over the years has led me to being the person who has been in the death chamber more than anyone else. And it's strictly a function of location, Texas, and longevity that I've been in Texas since 1983.. You know, the math adds up.
Yeah, I guess, you know, it is sort of this, I don't know, I guess, ethically or morally complicated question of kind of what should be the ultimate punishment. And, you know, you can kind of ask that question abstractly and kind of come up with one thing. I don't know if kind of like actually witnessing it and being there influences the way you feel about it or...
I haven't, I have never said, and I won't, that this is either good or bad, because it just, I don't see, I don't see of any value for the work that I have done or that I continue to do, since I continue to cover these freelance spaces for the AP. Somebody reading a story, if they know that, oh, I think that the death penalty is wonderful, or I think the death penalty is horrible. And if that comes out and that they know that, then they pick up a story with my name on it, interpret that story through that prism. And it's just not, it's not good. Besides, I don't think my editors would let me do this if I did take a stand one way or the other.
Yeah. Well, I don't want you to opine about whether the death penalty is good or bad. Maybe a better way of asking is something like, do you think there's something that, like people who haven't witnessed it, don't realize about it, or that, like people have kind of common misconceptions about this, that you view it differently than people who haven't had that personal experience?
The one, well, the one thing I tell folks who are going into the chamber for the first time as a reporter, and we gather in a media room beforehand, and there's certainly other reporters wanting to, you know, what am I going to see? So you go through the, you kind of go through the routine and you say, well, here's what's going to happen. One thing I stress with them is it's very quick. And at least here in Texas, it's very quick. Pay attention, because they're going to cough a couple of times or they're going to gasp a couple of times or they're going to start breathing deeply and start snoring.
But it's going to be done very, very quickly. That's what most people don't, I think, on the outside, don't realize, at least again here in Texas. Now, there have been instances in other states where they've had problems with the drugs or the drugs weren't administered properly. And, you know, they spent minutes and minutes and minutes in there waiting for this person to die. That has not been the case here.
Reporting this beat, has it changed your outlook on life or how you think about people?
Yeah, you're less trustful of people. And as our kids were growing up, and they're both adults now, you don't want them to be paranoid that there's a, you know, somebody lurking behind every tree or around every corner. But you want them to be aware that there are bad things out there. And kids, teenagers especially, feel invulnerable. You want to try to temper that invulnerability without making them paranoid.
But a case like this, it sticks with you just because of the notoriety of it. I mean, there are others that stick with you too, that are not necessarily of similar circumstances, but things that you can relate to. Part of the job, frankly. And again, I don't mean to be insensitive. I'm not some emotionless, cynical reporter.
But you've really got to check your emotions. Or you can't do your job. And you can't go to that prison or go to the death chamber and watch someone die if you're too worried about, gee, how am I going to react to this? You just can't. Because if you are, if you do, you better find something else to do.
It's like going to a sporting event and clapping and cheering or whatever. Sure, if you want to sit in the paid seats, go ahead and do that. But if you're sitting in the press box, what's the old saying? There's no cheering in the press box. And it's true.
And in a sense, that's what it's like to do, what we do either in a courtroom or in a police station or in a prison. You just, you check your emotions at the door.
What about the other way around? Did you ever kind of feel this stuff bleeding into your personal life?
On Christmas Eve, when I go to church and the choir is singing Silent Night, everyone is reveling in the spirit of the season of Christmas. And I'm thinking of being in the death chamber, where the final words of an inmate, as he's dying, was to sing Silent Night.
That's where my immediate thought goes to. I go back to that scene. So, in terms of how does it affect you personally, that's the one that gets me. That's one that always comes back, Silent Night. And I've been asked to speak to organizations about covering prisons or covering capital punishment, or just doing what I've done.
And I always preface it by saying, you may not remember anything that I say today, but come Christmas time, you remember this. It'll just, it'll flash at you. Oh yeah, I remember. he said, when they sing Silent Night, I think of somebody being put to death.
Sleep in heavenly peace.
For more information, including pictures, find us on social at The Ransom Podcast or visit our website, ransompodcast.
com. Ransom is researched and written by Ben Kebrick and hosted by me, Art Rascone. Production and sound design by Ben Kebrick, Aaron Mason, and Trent Sell, who also did the mixing. Co-created by Austin Miller. For Podcast One, executive producer Eli Dvorkin.
For Workhouse Media, executive producer Paul Anderson. And for KSL Podcasts, executive producer Cheryl Worsley. Ransom is produced by KSL Podcasts in association with Podcast One and Workhouse Media.
Thanks for listening to this bonus episode of Ransom. We'll be back on Wednesday with one more bonus episode, which looks at how this podcast came to be. If you enjoyed the show, please share it with a friend. Let them know that all the episodes are available now, so they can binge the whole thing.
v1.0.0.251205-1-20251207124656_os