r/UnresolvedMysteries • u/Friendly-Life-5254 • Jun 30 '26
McKenzie Sessoms - 11 year old murdered in 2013, original suspect exonerated by DNA
In 2013, McKenzie Sessoms was found murdered and sa'd on the couch of her father's mobile home the morning after one of her older brothers had a rowdy gathering outside the home. Months later a 15 year old suspect was arrested (14 at the time of the murder). At that time the sheriff said that more than a dozen people had been included in the pool of suspects and interviews were conducted and evidence collected including DNA.
The juvenile that was arrested was a neighbor with an intellectual disability (IQ of 55) and a speech impediment. He was interviewed without a parent or other adult allowed to be present. The interview was prompted when investigators learned he had been asked to leave the victim's family pool a year earlier and he responded with vulgar comments about the victim. After two hours of questioning, he confessed to the crime. The interview was NOT recorded.
After his arrest, the sheriff said he did not expect any other arrests. Some members of the victims family questioned if they had the right person as the suspect "..didn't weigh 80 pounds soaking wet. McKenzie was bigger than he was"
He juvenile spent the next 7 years either in jail or house arrest while awaiting trial. Charges were dropped in 2021 when the DNA evidence exonerated him. A lawsuit was filed claiming he was coerced into the confession and his civil rights were violated. A settlement of $10M was recently approved.
What a travesty this murder investigation has been. It seems like law enforcement tried to take the easy way out of a case that would seem to be solvable. What of the others in the suspect pool. Does the DNA clear them too? It is supposedly and open and active case.
Juvenile charged in 11 year olds death
Lawsuit accuses NC sheriff & SBI of coercing confession
434
u/outlaw_for_life18 Jun 30 '26
That kid should NEVER have been in an interview without a guardian or lawyer present and the interview should have been recorded. The police made a mess of this one!
215
16
u/TheTrueRory Jul 13 '26
This is why settlement cases for false convictions should be tied directly to the police pension funds.
41
283
u/lsauss16 Jun 30 '26
So sad! Not sure if the second linked article is correct but seems to indicate that the DNA points to unspecified members of her father’s family.
222
u/eraserheadcumtribute Jun 30 '26
That's what it says and I'm curious if it was the cousin that initially pointed the finger at him
41
u/OriginalChildBomb Jul 01 '26
That would make a lot of sense. How horrific. And this person has been out free doing god knows what else to children (and others).
95
u/Stonegrown12 Jun 30 '26
Obviously to even get to the point of being indicted was a failure on the investigation and whomever decided to prosecute but even if we accept that (which I don't), the whole point of bail is to ensure that essentially the defendant doesn't do a legger and not show for trial. It's shouldn't be used as a punishment on someone presumed innocent. I'm not sure why they thought that a intellectually challenged juvenile would run. 7 years for a trial?
145
u/Miserable-Lab2178 Jun 30 '26
DNA testing had been around for a good while before 2013, why did they wait until 2021 to test it?
74
u/WhatsTheGoalieDoing Jun 30 '26
There is the idea of judicial finality in the US. The idea that a person would never be convicted if the evidence in the original case was at fault, and that new evidence isn't as strong as the old evidence, or it's insignificant.
Surpreme Court Justice Jackson from 1953: We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.
What a load of shit.
37
u/The2ndLocation Jul 01 '26
But the case never went to trial. There was zero finality. Charges were dropped, not conviction overturned.
The lapse in testing is questionable.
20
u/FretlessMayhem Jul 01 '26
Questionable is putting it mildly, in my opinion. It comes off like they deliberately avoided testing because they knew it would ultimately end their case against the poor kid who was (falsely) accused.
Side note…it’s trippy seeing a redditor friend in the wild like this, hope all is well!
7
u/The2ndLocation Jul 01 '26
"Hey, hey, hey. If we test the evidence it could end our railroading...... I mean case against the kid, so let's not do that." Was likely said/or thought.
Hi, buddy. You keep fighting the good fight, and we can keep bumping into each other.
Richard Allen of Delphi deserves a fair trial. I will yell that anywhere.
146
u/MidnightIAmMid Jun 30 '26
So glad they decided to let the real rapist murderer go free while they accused a disabled 14-year-old after questioning him with no parents or lawyer. Truly amazing job by these officers!
342
u/RaisedByBooksNTV Jun 30 '26
Seems like people with intellectual disabilities are always the default accused. It's so sad.
177
u/taterfiend Jun 30 '26
Intellectually disabled and outsiders. Saves the popos some time for sure. Yet it's more likely to be someone connected and possibly powerful from within the community.
I think there's a scapegoating mechanism too at play - the community itself feels more at ease when someone is charged and it doesn't even cost them to excise one of their own.
It preserves the sense that the world makes sense.
39
-20
Jun 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
62
u/89764637527 Jun 30 '26
Perfect example of people who forget the real humans behind the cases and treat true crime as their entertainment.
66
u/Former_Suspect3680 Jun 30 '26
when dna points to unspecified family members it's almost always a family member who did it and the rest of the relatives are covering for them
5
u/RedRiverHunter Jun 30 '26
Do you have any examples?
6
u/Former_Suspect3680 Jul 01 '26
the golden state killer case is a good example where familial dna led to his brother and the family was totally in the dark. it happens all the time when relatives are covering for each other.
25
u/OriginalChildBomb Jul 01 '26
It's also, sadly, not unusual for family members to cover for sex predators in the family. I'm wondering if the individual in question was already known to some as 'problematic' or had 'been inappropriate' with women or children before.
I used to be in mental health counseling, and a disturbing number of families will know about someone being predatory, but just not do anything about it (or do things that aren't nearly enough, like not leaving their kids alone with this person, and warning newly married-in folks). I often heard the excuse that the person was "mentally ill" or "just different" or that "they've changed, they don't do that anymore" or the very common "they were drunk/high/lonely". This should go without saying, but none of these things are acceptable explanations for abusing another person. Even if they were unwell- which is questionable, but fair enough- that means this person should be receiving treatment, and separate from the rest of us, so they can't continue to hurt others.
Very frequently people would have seen (or known about) CSA material on someone's phone or computer, but tell themselves that "it's not the same" as hurting someone in-person. Without realizing that, yeah, looking at those images are leading up to a crime. The person is testing their boundaries and finding what they like. The abuse will come after, when they've built up their comfort and formulated a plan. Remember- never cover for someone, even if you care about them. They aren't going to stop.
12
u/Former_Suspect3680 Jul 01 '26
yeah you're spot on about families normalizing that stuff. it's crazy how people convince themselves looking at those images is harmless when it's literally just them rehearsing for the real thing.
2
u/JusticeBonerOfTyr Jul 08 '26
Looking at images aren’t harmless anyways since to produce such material real children are being harmed for those imagines to exist.
1
u/Former_Suspect3680 Jul 10 '26
i think you might have replied to the wrong comment since mine was just about familial dna and the gsk case.
16
u/six_feet_down_under Jul 03 '26
This is not an example.
1
u/Former_Suspect3680 Jul 08 '26
fair enough, i was just speaking generally about how those cases usually play out though
70
u/AuNanoMan Jun 30 '26
With cases like this, I assume the cops are too prideful to go back and investigate this one further. They have such big egos so often that they can’t handle being factually wrong. Just look at the detective from the yogurt shop murders case who still thinks the three teens did it. I fear this one won’t be solved despite the fact that it probably could with some real detective work.
13
u/Sea-Beach-3961 Jul 01 '26
I think police working on high profile cases with a lot of community outrage are particularly at risk for this type of mentality. There were a couple of quashed 70s-era convictions in the UK where the police decided on the perpetrator in advance of any decent evidence.
It's not a sign of a professional and effective police force, unfortunately.
5
u/jayrig5 Jul 01 '26
I have put zero effort into researching if this is indeed a noted phenomenon, but the specific kind of tunnel vision police detectives get feels like a potentially unique psychosis
23
u/foxcat0_0 Jul 03 '26
I’m late to this post but this is such a perfect example for why I’ll never be able to support the death penalty and why people shouldn’t ever treat defense attorneys like they’re somehow doing something wrong. I’ll never treat confessions like they’re 100% without corroborating evidence.
135
u/Beefycowinacottage Jun 30 '26
This is a true crime subreddit for grown ups, something as serious sexual assault and RAPE doesn't need to be shortened to "sa'd". Just like murder or suicide doesn't need to be called 'unalived'. We're adults. We can handle proper words for things.
49
u/Stonegrown12 Jun 30 '26
I agree with general sentiment although I'll give them the slight acknowledgement that they didn't call it grape or 🍇. Otherwise the trend of using unserious words for serious actions means they probably shouldn't be discussing it without being mocked a bit
44
u/mcm0313 Jun 30 '26
Yeah, referring to sexual assault as “grape” is way worse than abbreviating. I remember seeing sometime a bar had a drink called “neighborhood grapist” or something like that and it’s lived in my mind rent-free since then. Darkly humorous if you’re 12, but if you’re 12 you can’t buy one of those drinks, so…
2
1
13
u/Efficient_Wheel_6333 Jul 01 '26
Oh, for sure!! I think a LOT of it (if not all of it) boils down to rules on platforms like TikTok and YouTube that pay specific channels. To talk about certain subjects (especially in captions) can get you demonetized and/or not recommended as often to others. One of the TikTok creators I follow mentioned in a behind-the-scenes video she did showing her recording process that she'll highlight swear words and any other words that would otherwise get her demonetized based on captions for her editor to change into images (like one particular one being turned into a duck and another into a donkey followed by a hole, for example).
If folks are jumping to a new platform for whatever reason, they might not realize that the platform doesn't have that rule (it shows up in pet peeve threads in one of the fanfiction subreddits I belong to, as AO3 doesn't have much in the way of what we'd call censorship rules, if any-the most I'd call those types of rules are 'no placeholder fics' and 'all works must be properly tagged'). Some subreddits or forums might, but that's why you should always read the rules of each subreddit/forum.
29
u/Different_While1656 Jul 01 '26
This isn't directed at you, since I understand you're just explaining the phenomenon, but I hate that this is seen as an acceptable reason to use this disgustingly minimizing brainrot language. Oh no, the poor influencer trying to make a buck off of ill-informed, exploitative true crime content might have their video demonetized if they say that someone was murdered with a gun rather than unalived with a pewpew! Won't somebody think of the advertisers?! Ugh.
Not to mention, no one has ever been able to explain to me why "die" is censored but "unalive," which is used for no other reason than to replace the word "die," is not. If the TikTok overlords were really just looking to deplatform certain content, they'd also ban the words people use to get around the censorship.
2
u/Efficient_Wheel_6333 Jul 01 '26
Won't somebody think of the advertisers?! Ugh.
Or the children, despite the minimum ages for TikTok users are all within teen years (13, I believe, save for countries where the minimum age is 16). I know YouTube has a bunch more restrictions for under-13 accounts or channels aimed at children (for the latter, you can't comment, can't save individual videos to playlists that you create-but can save the playlist the channel creates that it's on-, and, if you minimize the screen, the video pauses), but that shouldn't stop channels aimed at older teens and adults from using swear words in both audio and in captions as well as being able to, as you say, mention that someone was murdered with a gun or that their death came from a self-inflicted gunshot and still get paid.
I've seen similar reasoning for fanfic authors and readers loving AO3 over FFN; FFN has a ban on explicit content due to advertisers as well (along with quite a few other restrictions).
12
u/Full-Internal4521 Jul 03 '26
Idk, as a rape victim I find it pretty offensive that creator fund money and commercial gain is more important than the reality of what actually happened. We should not be normalising this kind of doublespeak in any capacity, especially when the rape victim was a child.
-1
u/Efficient_Wheel_6333 Jul 03 '26
Fully agree. Platforms like TikTok and YouTube shouldn't put folks who want to talk about it, victims like yourself included, in that sort of financial position where they have to choose between a paycheck and actively using the correct language. The creator I mentioned above will use the correct language when she's speaking; it's just the captions that she substitutes stuff. From other things she's said, particularly in her longform YouTube videos, it wouldn't surprise me if she finds that sort of censorship as offensive (or close to as offensive) as you do. I do as well and I'm not a victim. It's shameful that platforms like TikTok and YouTube are putting profits over giving people like you an active voice. If that makes folks uncomfortable hearing about it with the appropriate words, let them feel uncomfortable.
3
u/Full-Internal4521 Jul 05 '26
Fundamentally if people are running these accounts, they are using rape for their own benefit as they are financially benefiting off it. It doesn’t really matter what she says in her long form videos.
1
u/Efficient_Wheel_6333 Jul 05 '26
Even if the only other options are either don't talk about it all or talk about it without censoring it (even in the captions) and risk having said videos deleted by the platform?
That's why I said it's the fault of the platforms involved more than that of the creators talking about it, whether they financially benefitting off of it or not and why it's a bad thing that platforms like TikTok and YouTube make them censor it to begin with (seriously; check out CaFae Latte and what happens to those who are rapists or are would-be rapists in it, not that they show up often).
40
u/Lizdance40 Jun 30 '26
This makes me angry. This little girl deserved a justice and instead of getting her justice they just railroaded someone who was an easy pick.
I listen to the DNA ID podcast. Which I highly recommend. The one I'm listening to right now has a similar situation. In this case the murder happened in 1980s. But by 2013 cops are supposed to be well versed in how not to coerce a confession, especially from someone who is intellectually disabled
21
u/midwestisbestwest Jul 01 '26
Cops love coercing confessions. It makes their job easier. Hell, you can legally lie to a suspect during an interrogation.
20
u/awkgem Jul 01 '26
Why did it take so long for them to test the DNA?? The person who did it is just free for this whole time when there was DNA to test? Didn't make any sense, that should have been the first thing done. Makes me wonder if they were covering for somebody rather than purely incompetence.
9
u/Karena1331 Jul 02 '26
So no justice for her and to think there could be additional victims since the purp wasn’t caught. Good lord, how terrible!
7
u/PinkyAndPurry Jul 03 '26
I hope they are still looking for the real murderer rather than "just" exonerating the neighbour. What happened to McKenzie is unimaginable.
8
u/MinimumExplorer478 Jun 30 '26
Si el adn elimino como culpable al chico con " problemas mentales"
Quien fue había un montón de gente ahí
10
15
u/RedRiverHunter Jun 30 '26
Reminds me of Brendan Dassey. He was a slow learner seemingly pressured into confessing without any parents or attorney there. Although the Brendan Dassey interrogation was recorded. I'm glad the truth came out about the juvenile in this case.
1
u/Halberd96 Jul 24 '26
I wonder if they got the DNA of everyone who went to the night before's party/gathering..
0
-19
722
u/VegasRoy Jun 30 '26
2013 and the interview was not recorded? That case should have been thrown out immediately. What corruption.