Have you heard that there is a suspect in the 1991 murder of Dorothy Donovan? The man's name is Gilbert E. Cannon. Here is one of the articles:

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060121/NEWS/601210334/-1/NEWS01

The case was shown on UM at the end of the 1994-95 season, and has been discussed at this board in the past. However, just in case you're unfamiliar with it, here is a concise synopsis:

Dorothy Donovan was a 70-year-old woman who was found stabbed to death in her Delaware home in 1991. The alleged culprit was an unknown hitchhiker that her son, Charles Holden, picked up earlier; Charles soon got rid of the hitchhiker and sped away when the man became violent. The hitchhiker was later allegedly seen approaching Dorothy's home. Charles was suspected, but the blood at the crime scene ruled him out.

Nice find Kane. The suspect does resemble the sketch that was profiled on UM. I'm happy for the family that possibly the person responsible was finally captured!

Wow! Good article. That was easily one of the creepiest segments ever profiled on UM. It was also beyond belief that this hitchhiker could randomly choose the property of the same man who had given him a ride miles away. Add that to the fact that robbery and/or sexual assault were not motives, and it is clear why the police assumed that she and possibly her son knew the killer.

DNA has nabbed another one.

I'm continually impressed how Kane and others here find those updates so soon. I mean, that article is two days old. Do you guys frequently search for specific names involved in the cases, and once in a while a new entry pops up atop the Google list? I'm asking in amazement as much as curiosity.

Yes, I'll echo Thinman: Wow! Very memorable case and one I doubted would be solved.

That article is excellent, very detailed. But if left me with little respect for the two sisters since they apparently doubted their brother's story and, at least partially, blamed him for the mother's death. To the point of estrangement which is sick.

I never had a negative impression of the murdered woman's son at all. He seemed very genuine and devastated. I thought he took sensible precaution to avoid the specific location where he lived after eluding the guy. Maybe you can question driving back to Hardees and calling police instead of finding a closer phone after he saw the guy at the residence, or of leaving the residence instead of contronting the person. But after being threatened by a wild nutcase with a screwdriver, or similar, I'm not sure I wouldn't have embraced the same stategy.

Nice flub by the profilers in 2001, concluding Mrs. Donovan knew her killer. I would have bet against that from the first day it was proposed. Just further evidence of a lack of understanding of probability among law enforcement.

I think it was a reasonable assumption that Mrs. Donovan knew her killer. She had not been sexually assaulted and her house had not been ransacked. It appeared as though murder was the only motive. Also, the brutality of the crime made it seem personal, as if this person really hated Mrs. Donovan.

The part of the article I didn't understand was when it said that Holden saw the hitchhiker looking out the window of his trailer when he returned home. I thought I remembered, from the UM segment, Holden seeing the guy walking across the yard toward the farmhouse.

The part of the article I didn't understand was when it said that Holden saw the hitchhiker looking out the window of his trailer when he returned home. I thought I remembered, from the UM segment, Holden seeing the guy walking across the yard toward the farmhouse.

I remembered that part from the segment. Either the UM segment or the news article made an unfortunate mistake.

I'm continually impressed how Kane and others here find those updates so soon. I mean, that article is two days old. Do you guys frequently search for specific names involved in the cases, and once in a while a new entry pops up atop the Google list? I'm asking in amazement as much as curiosity.

I search through Google (as well as other search engines). When I'm at the Google news section (which is very frequent), I would often type in "Unsolved Mysteries". However, I should stress that articles about UM cases don't always mention the fact that the case in question was profiled on the show. Therefore, it is sensible to type in other words and/or combination of words. Sometimes, typing in a combination of generic words can help.

That's how I finally discovered some links on the 1981 Texas murders of a mother and son. For years, I couldn't remember the names of the victims since I had only seen the segment once, and the case was apparently never rerun on cable. But what I remembered about the case (which UM profiled in 1994) was that the little boy was murdered on his fifth birthday in December 1981. After some digging, I eventually learned that the victims' names were Roxann Jo Jeeves and Kristopher Korper. In addition, I discovered that a man was arrested in connection to the case; in 2003, a man named George Washington Hicks was linked to the murders through DNA.

Nice flub by the profilers in 2001, concluding Mrs. Donovan knew her killer. I would have bet against that from the first day it was proposed. Just further evidence of a lack of understanding of probability among law enforcement.

Yeah, I'd agree that conclusion is pretty absurd. Talk about not looking at the big picture. That's the kind of conclusion one might make if they had no witnesses and nothing else to go on. Did they just completely ignore the son's eye witness account?

Yeah, I'd agree that conclusion is pretty absurd. Talk about not looking at the big picture. That's the kind of conclusion one might make if they had no witnesses and nothing else to go on. Did they just completely ignore the son's eye witness account?

Precisely, nohwheregirl. That's exactly what I was going to stress before seeing your post. An inability to grasp the big picture is something that often infuriuates me regarding law enforcement. You would think all the witnesses at Hardees would have been more than enough to certify it was a stranger offense. Either that, or conclude the person who the son gave the ride to was not the murderer, an outrageous excursion beyond probability since it requires multiple variables instead of one.

For the profilers to conclude Mrs. Donovan knew her killer, they absolutely had to disregard the son's story. The aspects of a rage killing, indicating overkill, and no sexual assault only make sense if you conclude the son made it up or was part of a conspiracy. Otherwise, you have clear evidence of a deranged person in the area who had a weapon, plus he may have had knowledge the son would be returning soon so there wasn't time for a sexual assault or robbery without placing himself in jeopardy of capture.

Admittedly the last part requires some guesswork, but also an understanding of likely course of events. It's unclear whether the murderer knew the residence was connected to the person who gave him the ride. My estimate would be yes. First of all, it's a small town. That was stressed early in the UM segment and is very clear if you do some research online.

The suspect, Cannon, was in the son's truck for several miles. It's hardly inconceivable he saw a letter or a magazine or something that listed the Donovan's address. More likely, he simply connected the specific vehicle and/or person to that trailer and residence via previous knowledge. Just look at the article. Cannon was sentenced to 12 years on robbery. You tell me a guy like that couldn't have cased the entire small town for potential targets with an awareness of who lived where and which vehicles they owned? They only drove a few miles after leaving Hardees.

My guess would be Cannon was enraged when the son outsmarted him and headed straight to the residence after the son sped off.

Just because the police originally thought that Mrs. Donovan knew her killer doesn't mean that they were tunnel-visioned by that thought. Police have to come up with a theory as soon as they see a crime scene. That points to certain suspects and leads the initial investigation. I'm sure after that theory proved fruitless they explored other avenues of possibilities. This would still have been an extremely hard case to solve, regardless of what the police originally thought. Without the help of DNA, it still would be unsolved. There was a psychotic killer on the loose in a small town who nobody recognized and who didn't belong. Then, he fled after committing his crime. That's a hard one to solve even for the most sophisticated police force.

Just because the police originally thought that Mrs. Donovan knew her killer doesn't mean that they were tunnel-visioned by that thought. Police have to come up with a theory as soon as they see a crime scene. That points to certain suspects and leads the initial investigation. I'm sure after that theory proved fruitless they explored other avenues of possibilities. This would still have been an extremely hard case to solve, regardless of what the police originally thought. Without the help of DNA, it still would be unsolved. There was a psychotic killer on the loose in a small town who nobody recognized and who didn't belong. Then, he fled after committing his crime. That's a hard one to solve even for the most sophisticated police force.

Thinman, I probably didn't emphasize enough I wasn't criticizing law enforcement as being tunnel vision early in that case. I agree that was an extremely difficult case. The article says profilers concluded in 2001 that Mrs. Donovan knew her killer. That was my primary beef, the profilers many years after the fact, not the original investigation. I bet that faulty conclusion in 2001 further divided the son and his sisters, which is regretful. It's not really surprising the son didn't comment once Cannon was identified and charged.

Without seeing the area it's difficult to guess how the suspect found that specific house. If there were 100 residences and he somehow picked the right one, that is beyond belief. We didn't hear or read any reports of the strange frenzied man rustling through other yards and homes, so that's partially what leads me to conclude he knew just where to go. Plus, why would he kill the woman unless he had particular reason to be enraged at someone else in the family? There are no other reports of this guy being a murderer.

The son might have said something during the brief ride from Hardees that indicated where he lived, and/or that he lived on the same property as his elderly mother. Remember, at that point he didn't consider the guy a threat. You can't take the UM dialogues as an absolute, that nothing else was said. That's ludicrous.

The suspect also might have seen the son and his mother together previously, and put it together after the son took off in the truck. The UM segment really didn't give any indication how far away the home was, after the son stopped the truck and asked the guy to get out. It might have been just down the road and not many homes/trailers there. Cannon could logically assume the home was down that road and taken off in that direction, if he hadn't already deduced the specific location.

Since I'm always worried about an innocent person being charged, you have to think how close this case could have come. Let's say the son picked up Cannon while the Hardees was relatively empty and there were no other witnesses. I know damn well I've been in rural Hardees and other fast food joints late at night with no one else there. Also, if there hadn't been the bloody palm print on the stair rail, a sloppy mistake by the suspect. The son's story was already bizarre so if you eliminate those aspects he easily could have been the prime suspect and perhaps charged.

Good post. I agree. As a great a show as UM is, I'm sure the writers left out details of certain cases to really play up the mystery element for the audience. This was never as clear to me as it was after I read Neal Hall's book on Cindy James. Hollywood does the same for "based on a true story" movies.

Cannon probably did have some idea where Holden and his mother lived. It could have been as simple as Holden introducing himself by his full name. Then, after getting out of the truck, Cannon found the nearest pay phone to look up Holden's address in the phone book. In other words, the explanation has to be simpler than him picking one of hundreds of houses randomly.

I agree with all the above. In the Keith Reinhard segment UM made it sound like he was despondent and obsessed with Tom Young, even writing a novel loosely based on him. After I watched that segment I really thought it was possible that Keith went up in that mountain with the intention of committing suicide. I was able to obtain some newspaper articles dated around the time he was missing. There was absolutely no mention of his fascination with Tom Young, nor of him being despondent. They even published a letter that Keith had written to his wife shortly before he had disappeared. He seemed full of life and enthusiasm and mentioned he had recently tried to conquer the mountain and was unsuccessful and if his friend hadn't helped him he would still be up there. He expressed enthusiasm to get back and try and conquer the mountain again soon and I believe something happened to him on the mountain and he perished there (although he has never been found dead or alive). It seems UM thought it sounded more exciting to play up the whole "I want to be like Tom Young" angle.

I wanted to add that another interesting item in the article was the long delay before the police officer arrived to accompany the son to the scene. I don't think I picked up that fact from the UM story, which coincidentally aired this week.

I really think it's sad that Charles' sisters almost blame him for their mothers death. It's not like he actually invited him over he dropped him off miles from their home and took a different route how was he to know?? But I'm glad they caught this creep. And I don't understand why they would think she knew her killer. Like people don't killed by a crazy psycho path ever??

I really think it's sad that Charles' sisters almost blame him for their mothers death. It's not like he actually invited him over he dropped him off miles from their home and took a different route how was he to know?? But I'm glad they caught this creep. And I don't understand why they would think she knew her killer. Like people don't killed by a crazy psycho path ever??


I'm NOT saying that I agree with the sisters, but I understand where they are coming from. It's easy to look back and say, "If you hadn't picked this guy up, Mom would still be alive." They're not thinking about things that could have happened... like the hitchhiker finding the mother's house regardless of whether or not Charles picked him up.

One thing that I thought was interesting about the segment was the theory that the hitchhiker was high on crack. Was there any further development to this theory?

I search through Google (as well as other search engines). When I'm at the Google news section (which is very frequent), I would often type in "Unsolved Mysteries". However, I should stress that articles about UM cases don't always mention the fact that the case in question was profiled on the show. Therefore, it is sensible to type in other words and/or combination of words. Sometimes, typing in a combination of generic words can help.

That's how I finally discovered some links on the 1981 Texas murders of a mother and son. For years, I couldn't remember the names of the victims since I had only seen the segment once, and the case was apparently never rerun on cable. But what I remembered about the case (which UM profiled in 1994) was that the little boy was murdered on his fifth birthday in December 1981. After some digging, I eventually learned that the victims' names were Roxann Jo Jeeves and Kristopher Korper. In addition, I discovered that a man was arrested in connection to the case; in 2003, a man named George Washington Hicks was linked to the murders through DNA.

Thanks for those details, Kane. I don't go to that News section of Google enough.

And I completely agree the use of minor words in connection with the primary topic is vital. My dad is a college professor but he just can't get the hang of it so he finds search engines almost worthless. Whenever I search for a name, for instance, I'll always stick in one or two relevant words that isolate what I'm looking for. Sometimes it's just a year or town or occupation or whatever. Also it helps to understand which words are used in newspaper articles. For instance, murder is used much more often than murdered. I knew that from my years as a journalist, but I just tested via Google and it held up dramatically, with 44,600,000 entries for murdered compared to almost four times that many for murder, 148,000,000.

Good post. I agree. As a great a show as UM is, I'm sure the writers left out details of certain cases to really play up the mystery element for the audience. This was never as clear to me as it was after I read Neal Hall's book on Cindy James. Hollywood does the same for "based on a true story" movies.

Cannon probably did have some idea where Holden and his mother lived. It could have been as simple as Holden introducing himself by his full name. Then, after getting out of the truck, Cannon found the nearest pay phone to look up Holden's address in the phone book. In other words, the explanation has to be simpler than him picking one of hundreds of houses randomly.

That's another good point. In a small town there's very little hesitancy to have your number listed, and of course this was many years ago so I'm sure it was even closer to 100% then. I'm trying to picture that little market or store where the confrontation between Cannon and Charles Donovan took place. If UM took that scene from actual events the pay phone might have been right there.

I wanted to add that another interesting item in the article was the long delay before the police officer arrived to accompany the son to the scene. I don't think I picked up that fact from the UM story, which coincidentally aired this week.

Yes, it was weird they showed the segment one day after Kane found the article and posted this thread. That was great since it refreshed so many aspects of the case. Frankly, I hadn't remembered the two sisters were also featured on the UM segment.

As far as their reaction, I can understand their stance only if they repeatedly stressed a theme of safety precautions and not picking up strangers, etc. Maybe that Hardees was a known local hangout for less than upstanding characters. In that case the second guessing might be proper, although rejecting another family member is hardly a positive strategy, IMO. If it was a safe small town in Delaware with no recent high crime wave at that point or any warnings of such, I think the sisters are borderline despicable in their treatment of their brother.

hipster91, you're right, the UM segment strangely didn't even hint there was a long delay between the son calling the police and the police officer arriving. The article states 1:19 AM for the call and 3 AM when the policewoman arrived at Hardees. The delay probably didn't impact the murder but definitely allowed Cannon time to escape. And even more evidence the son was extremely lucky to have the witnesses. I mean, it must have been midnight or later when he gave a ride to Cannon, considering how close the Hardees was to the residence.

This case gave me the creeps even though I hadn't seen it until 2003 through a Lifetime rerun (from the 2001/2 eps). I am so glad that this guy's been identified after all these years and it's a great start for 2006 in regards to UM cold cases.

This really enraged me when I saw it a few minutes ago, in the other thread on this topic started by akburke. It's a line at the bottom of this link provided by akburke, a story regarding the arrest of Gilbert Cannon: http://www.wmdt.com/topstory/displaystory.asp?id=1519

"Police say Charles Holden is no longer a prime suspect for the Donovan murder."

Does that mean he WAS a prime suspect all along, since 1991? If so, those investigators should be dropped from the highest cloud.

Let's hope that was merely sloppy writing and journalism from a television station reporter, which wouldn't be uncommon. But it will be interesting to look at follow-up accounts of this case, and a potential trial, to see if the local authorities were incompetent enough to suspect Charles all along.

Earlier in this thread I wrote it was fortunate for Charles that he had witnesses at the Hardees and a bloody palm print at the scene that didn't match him, but the way investigators are desperate to point the finger and close a case, maybe that wasn't enough. I saw an account today of someone who has just been released from prison via DNA evidence after 24 years of false conviction and imprisonment on a rape charge.

I think there's a good chance something with Charles' address on it could have fallen out of the truck during the scuffle. What if there was a paper or piece of mail with his address in there? Even something as simple as a magazine he was subscribed to? It could have easily come out when either man raced from the car, etc. That's what I've always guessed happened.

I think there's a good chance something with Charles' address on it could have fallen out of the truck during the scuffle. What if there was a paper or piece of mail with his address in there? Even something as simple as a magazine he was subscribed to? It could have easily come out when either man raced from the car, etc. That's what I've always guessed happened.

Even if that were true, it was too dark out to see an address on someone's house or a mailbox. Cannon said in his interrogation (on Forensic Files) that he was high on cocaine (as police and Stack suspected in the UM episode) and he wanted a place to crash for the night. He saw only one house with its outside light off, that one being Dorothy's, so he broke in, awakening Dorothy, He stabbed her to death with the screwdriver he took from Charles' truck. He didn't know that she was the mother of the guy he just tried to carjack, all of this just an unfortunate coincidence.

Even if that were true, it was too dark out to see an address on someone's house or a mailbox. Cannon said in his interrogation (on Forensic Files) that he was high on cocaine (as police and Stack suspected in the UM episode) and he wanted a place to crash for the night. He saw only one house with its outside light off, that one being Dorothy's, so he broke in, awakening Dorothy, He stabbed her to death with the screwdriver he took from Charles' truck. He didn't know that she was the mother of the guy he just tried to carjack, all of this just an unfortunate coincidence.

I was just about to post a message like this one. The killer admitted that he was high on drugs and that he chose the house because it was the first, or only, house with no lights on. There was no connection at all with Charles - what a chilling coincidence. This was one re-enactment that really stuck with me: seeing the killer walking across the lawn ... it was just so shocking and terrifying. I'm so glad that he has been caught.

What a nightmare for the son. But to be fair, I can see why he would have been the prime suspect. This is one of the most incredible stories I have seen on UM. No wonder the police would have looked at his version of events with a critical eye. I mean, it truly is stranger than fiction. Of course, there was eyewitness evidence to corroborate the presence of the hitchhiker, as well as the handprint at the scene, which is surely why he was (thankfully) never charged. Talk about living a nightmare.

I'm so glad this one was solved. one of the most disturbing cases that was ever featured. I will never forget how chilling this one was. My heart goes out to charles and his family.

Oh, I haven't seen the FF episode. I will have to check it out. Yes, if he was that high on drugs and it was too dark/no numbers on the homes, you're right, just a crazy coincidence. It really blows my mind that he would just happen to go to the place with the guy's mother. The part with the killer walking across the lawn also scares the hell out of me!

The killer happening to pick that house sounds a lot weirder when you're not from the area. In 1991 I lived about 20 minutes from there.

I don't know the exact address, but "remote" and "outside Harrington" means that even now there is basically nothing out there. It's farm country. You'll get one farm house every once in a while with a burnt-out shack to keep land value down. Maybe a subdivision in the middle of a field. In 1991 it was just the farmhouses and shacks. Holden said the hitchhiker left the car at the intersection where he'd normally turn to go home which means he can't have been that far out. I would bet a bunch of money that he picked Donovan's house because it was the only one around.

As to why he didn't stop and use a closer phone, there is no closer phone. There's seriously jack-all out there and the Hardees is at the very edge of Harrington.

If anyone is interested, Forensic Files did a segment on this case. If you to go the forbidden site and type in "Forensic Files Stranger in the Night", you can view it. A lot more information in this segment than the UM one.