Dream Killer
A Young Man Dreams He Murdered A Man
-
Play CBS Video Video Police Interviews Watch excerpts of the police interviews with Chuck Erickson, who dreamed that he killed a man; and Ryan Ferguson, whom Erickson also implicated in the crime. The tapes play a major role in the case.
-
Video Reporter's Notebook "48 Hours" correspondent Erin Moriarty talks about the case of Chuck Erickson, a young man who dreamt that he murdered a man.
-
-
Chuck Erickson also implicated his friend, Ryan Ferguson, pictured, in the murder. (CBS)
-
Kent Heitholt worked late into the night on Halloween 2001. After leaving the newspaper's offices, he was slain in a parking lot. (CBS)
-
Two years after the murder of Columbia Tribune Sports Editor Kent Heitholt, Chuck Erickson, pictured, told friends he dreamed he was involved in the killing. (CBS)
-
-
Interactive Forensics 101 Find out more about forensics, DNA and some cases in which DNA has made a difference.
-
Interactive FBI Crime Statistics Explore the latest information on U.S. crime, from acts of violence to property damage.
-
News Tools 48 Hours: E-mail Alert What's coming up? Sign up for our weekly e-mail alert.
Chuck Erickson, 21, does have a troubled history of drug and alcohol abuse. His friends say he is prone to outrageous behavior and he himself says he was arrested for felony forgery - an indication of deceit in the past. Yet for two long days on the witness stand, Chuck stuck by his story even when defense attorneys played those videotapes.
"I mean, I might not even know what I’m talking about," Erickson said in his taped police interview.
"You didn’t know whether or not you’d done it, isn’t that what you were telling him?" a defense lawyer asked.
"I was telling him that but it’s all just rushing at me, 'My God I killed this man, I gotta take responsibility for this now. I’ve gotta tell them what that man did.' It was a hard thing to do," Erickson replied.
Crane had another witness, Dallas Mallory - the friend that Chuck says he saw right after the murder. A statement from Mallory confirms that he "saw Ryan Ferguson and Chuck Erickson together."
But, by the time of trial, Dallas told 48 Hours a very different story.
Asked if he remembered seeing either Chuck or Ryan later that night, Dallas said, "No."
Dallas says the police simply didn’t want to hear that he was too drunk that night to remember anything.
"They kept on telling me, 'Well, Chuck said this, he said he saw you,' " he says. "I was bawling in tears and I said, 'Well, is that what you want me to say? That I did it when I didn’t? I can say that, if it’s gonna make me get out of this building quicker and I can go home.' "
He says he only gave that statement under duress and is terrified he will have to testify. To his relief, he was not called.
But Jerry Trump was called to the witness stand. Trump is the janitor who glimpsed the men by Heitholt’s car but had said at the time he could not provide a detailed description.
But at trial, when asked if he saw that individual or individuals, Trump pointed to Ryan.
Trump has had his own problems with the law. He was in prison when he saw the arrest photos of Ryan and Chuck in the newspaper - and, like Chuck, says the paper jolted his memory.
At trial, Trump was far more confident about the killers' identities than even the victim’s daughter, Kali Heitholt.
Asked if she was troubled by the lack of physical evidence linking the suspects to the crime, Kali says, "Yeah, it does a lot. I mean you’d think that they would have left physical evidence, like being so young and stupid. They would have missed something."
Still, Kali is taken by Chuck’s testimony. "I wouldn’t think he would lie unless he really is crazy. But he didn’t seem crazy on the stand."
Radio talk show host Tony Messenger believes the state’s case against Ryan may be in jeopardy.
"Unless the jury bought Chuck Ferguson’s story, unless they can get beyond, either lies he has told or inconsistencies in his memory, Chuck Erickson’s testimony was not enough to convict Ryan Ferguson," Messenger said on his radio show.
Messenger is anxious to see if Ryan will be more convincing when he says he had nothing to do with Heitholt's murder.
By Gail Zimmerman
© MMVIII, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.



- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 65 CommentsKent left work and was feeding the stray cat. The Janitor hated it. They had words. The janitor lost it and went postal on Kent. When he saw all the blood realized that he killed the guy he decided to make it look like a robbery. Then - probably knowing the ineptitude of the police department - he figured he'd cover his tracks if he pretended to be an eyewitness and report the body.
The jurors admitted that they had already decided Ryan's guilt before hearing the evidence. Bad Jurors!!! Idiots.. I guess that's proof you don't want to live in a town full of imbeciles!
I hope Ryan's Dad reads this and gets a private investigator to look into the Janitor's DNA, and get it compared to the evidence!
I don''t think Chuck was trying to be malicious. I think something about this case got to him mentally and he had a dream and the dream freaked him out. At that point, he TRIED REALLY HARD TO REMEMBER and actually convinced himself there were memories to be retrieved. Then, armed with details spoon fed by the investigators, he filled in the gaps (errors) in his mind with the details and became utterly convinced the whole thing happened.
I see this for what it was. The sad part is that neither the jury nor the DA/Prosecuter thought anything was amiss and that Chuck was accurate. Chuck didn''t lie (intentionally deceive) he''s just sorely mistaken... to the tune of costing him and his old friend their lives.
Second, the prosecuter had idiot stamped across his forehead throughout the show. He demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of simple investigative techniques and had no understanding of cognition. Further, the jury made me want to vomit. I don''t know where this crime occured, but I''m wondering if the collective IQ of the town is over 100.
I know what I''m talking about. I learned cognition from one of the best in the WORLD, and she appeared on the show (and testified in the trial). In a lecture I attended several years ago, I watched as she planted a false memory into the class and they all believed it was REAL. Memories are far more fragile than the average person realizes.
I just can''t belive that this jury found this young man guilty of a crime when there was so much evidence at the scene and none of it was linked to the suspect. I just pray that he gets a new trial and that he is set free on the facts that he wasn''t linked to this crime.
It is hard to believe that someone can say that you did a crime and that a jury of 12 people would believe the word of one person with no other link to you. It really scares me that someone could be so angry at a person that they would give up part of their life just to hurt that person. And it is harder to believe that 12 people would believe that person over the evidence.
This is the first time one of your shows has touched me so much that I needed to post a comment.
God bless Ryan and his family while they seek to justice for himself and their son was a miscarriage of justice.
Police and prosecutors don''t always care about facts.
Once you''re indicted there is a presumption of guilt rather than a presumption on innocence. Many defense attorneys and Judges are incompetent. Prosecutors coach their witnesses and have no problem suborning perjury. The testimony of anyone cooperating with the government for a reduced sentence should be discounted greatly. The government often makes a deal with the party who takes a plea in order to punish someone who will not take a plea and who insists on their constitutional right to a jury trial.
After a jury verdict for the prosecution it is not uncommon for the prosecutor to have his tie cut off and hung on a wall like a trophy. "Good Job" it doen''t matter that you''ve destroyed a young mans life for personal gain or caused a respected family untold grief. The prosecutors reward for this victory was a position as a judge and who knows maybe even someday a lifetime appointment to the bench.
Why do I know these things? Because I refused to accept an 18 month plea agreement for a crime I did not commit. My reward was to be convicted by a jury and sentenced to 60 months.
I lost my direct appeal (Harmless Error). The supreme court chose not to hear my case.
I can only hope and pray the Ferguson''s will have better luck.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 65 Comments