Hey y’all, it’s Julie Mattson, and in this week’s episode of Pushing Up Lilies, I’m taking you into one of California’s most haunting cold cases, the Keddie murders. Over the night of April 11–12, 1981, four people were brutally killed inside a quiet mountain cabin in Keddie, California. Decades later, the case remains unsolved, leaving behind unanswered questions, lost evidence, and families still searching for justice. In this episode, I walk you through what we know about that night, the disturbing crime scene details, and the investigative missteps that may have cost this case its chance at resolution. I also share my perspective as a forensic nurse death investigator, looking at how cases like this impact communities, why cold cases matter, and what it means when silence lingers for over forty years. This is a heavy one, but it’s an important story that deserves to be remembered. If you love true crime with a forensic lens, join me, and as always, thank you for listening, sharing, and helping keep these stories alive.
CONNECT WITH JULIE MATTSON:
• Website: https://pushinguplilies.com
• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pushinguplilies
00:06
Welcome to Pushing Up Lilies. I'm your host, Julie Mattson. Pushing Up Lilies is a weekly true crime podcast with spine tingling, unusual and terrifyingly true stories from my perspective as a forensic death investigator and a sexual assault nurse examiner. Do I have some stories for you? Are you ready?
00:31
Hey guys, welcome to another episode of Pushing Up Lilies. I'm so excited to be here this week. Got a lot of big speaking events coming up that I'm gonna tell y'all about in a little bit, but tonight I'm gonna go back to Northern California to a small mountain community called Keddie.
Now this story goes back to 1981, but I found it really interesting as I was doing my research. Keddie actually sits in Plumas County near Quincy in an area built around rail lines, pine trees, and a resort that has definitely seen better days. But what happened there on the night of April 11th into the early morning of April 12th, 1981, still hangs over the place like smoke that never cleared. There were four victims, one of them missing at first, and years of anger about how the case was handled. And we see this a lot. And decades later, a file that still refuses to close. But I wanna set expectations right now. This story is brutal and it looks violent because it was violent, but it also holds a lesson that death investigators learn very early in our career. Death doesn't always look violent, and it doesn't always announce itself with obvious trauma. Sometimes it hides behind routine, and sometimes it hides behind poor documentation, and sometimes it hides behind fear in a small town where people see everything and say nothing.
So, the center of this case is actually cabin 28 at the Keddie Resort. So, in 1980, a woman named Glenna Sue Sharp moved there with her children after leaving Connecticut. She had separated from her husband. She came west to be closer to her brother, and she was trying to basically restart her life, but she had limited money, but she had a lot of responsibility. So, Sue had five children. John Sharp was 15, Sheila was 14, Tina was 12, and the two younger boys, Rick and Greg, were 10 and five. They lived in cabin 28 at the Keddie Resort through the winter. So they went to school, they made friends, and they settled into a community where everyone knew everyone. I love that small town feel. John had friends who visited, and one of them was Dana Hall Wingate. She was 17, a neighborhood friend. On April 11th, 1981, Dana was with John, and they're not involved hitchhiking to Quincy for a party. And then they got back to Keddie actually later.
That same night, Tina wanted to sleep over at a neighbor's house. Sue had told her no, and she came back home. Sheila was already spending the night with a friend, and that detail matters because Sheila actually becomes the person who walks into the scene the next morning. So, Sheila's not home. Here's what investigators say next. I'm gonna keep it very tight and factual. Sometimes during the late hours, Sue Sharp, John Sharp, and Dana Wingate were attacked inside cabin 28. All three were bound with a mix of electrical cords and tape, and they were beaten and stabbed. Their bodies ended up in the living room. Now two knives and a hammer were found at the scene, and blood evidence in the home actually supported the living room as the primary site of the murders.
04:32
Sue was found near the living room sofa, and she was actually nude from the waist down, and she was gagged with a blue bandana and her own underwear secured with tape over her face. John and Dana were also bound, and Tina was not in the home when the bodies were found. Now we get to the part of the story that death investigators never stop talking about because it happens in real life more than people think. People enter the scene before law enforcement secures it, and they enter out of panic, love, denial, or just out of hope that someone is still alive.
So, in Keddie, Sheila returned to cabin 28 on the morning of April 12th and discovered Sue, John, and Dana. Now she ran for help, as anyone would, and a neighbor, Jamie Seabolt, went to the cabin and removed the three surviving boys through a bedroom window. Now, he later acknowledges that he had also entered through a door to check for signs of life, which is human and completely understandable, but it also changes a scene forever. The three surviving boys were Rick Sharp, Greg Sharp, and their friend, Justin Smartt, who was sleeping over. Now they were all physically unharmed in the back bedroom, and Tina Sharp, a 12-year-old, was missing. Now pause right there, because this is a core point in death investigation work. When a scene involves multiple victims and a missing child, that investigation actually shifts instantly. It's no longer a homicide; it's also a child abduction.
Investigators have to treat every minute as a threat to life and a threat to evidence. And they also have to assume that the offender had contact with the missing child after the murders, which expands the crime scene far beyond just one cabin. Now, what does a death investigator do first in a case like this? And we've talked about this before. Scene safety is priority. Then scene preservation and then documentation. So, we definitely would control access. One entry point, one exit point, a list of every person who enters and why they are entering. What is their purpose there? Because every footprint matters, every fiber, every hair matters in cases like this.
Now in 1981, DNA work was limited, but physical evidence still definitely mattered. Blood patterns, binding, knots, tape tears, shoe impressions, fingerprints, tool marks, all these details either build a case or get lost. So, a death investigator also thinks about victim order and offender behavior. Who was targeted first? Who does it look like actually fought? Who was restrained early? Who was restrained later? Where did the bindings come from? Were they taken from inside the home or were they brought by the person who committed this crime? Now in Keddie, at least some of the weapons appear to have come from the cabin. That often points to offenders who arrived without a full plan or without tools or offenders who actually expected to intimidate and really weren't gonna kill. They have to grab for a weapon later. And then it escalates. This also fits offenders who feel comfortable enough to use what was in the residence, someone who may have been familiar. Now the bindings matter too, cords and tape take time.
08:32
Restraining three people actually takes a lot of control and coordination. That often suggests more than one offender because investigators involved really think that this is consistent with multiple offenders at this scene. And then there's Tina, she's missing. We don't assume she ran away. We don't assume she wandered off. It's treated as an abduction tied to homicides until evidence actually proves otherwise. And that means immediate searches, going to the neighbor's house, checking vehicles, roadblocks so no one can get in and out of the area and interviewing everybody who saw that family and separating witnesses quickly, so they don't start sharing information and stories don't start merging. Now one of the key witnesses in Keddie was Justin Smartt. He was 12 years old. And reports from later coverage actually described how his account shifted. With early statements, he framed it like a dream and then later he actually described men coming into the cabin. In some accounts he described two men, one with a mustache, one with longer hair and described that Tina was escorted out. And those sketches of the person who he described were actually released publicly.
Now, from a death investigator's perspective, a child witnessed in a mass homicide scene is very crucial and fragile because trauma, you know, when we experience trauma, we're going to forget things. Fear actually distorts our memory. And adults often push a child to talk before they really know how to put together what's happened. They can't find the language. A solid investigation treats that child like evidence and also like a human. It uses trained investigators. It's recorded properly. It avoids leading questions. It protects the child from the pressure of the community. But now we move into what happened after the initial scene because this is where Katie becomes infamous. The case drew attention, but it also drew criticism because over time, observers, journalists, even investigators voiced concern that this investigation was mishandled in the beginning.
Years later, Sheriff Greg Hagwood revived attention to the case and Plumas County Special Investigator Mike Gamberg publicly criticized the original investigation as having been poorly executed. Now, one reason this criticism hit so hard is because the evidence should have been powerful. A bloody close contact scene usually leaves a lot behind. There's usually blood transfer, cast off patterns, latent prints, hairs, fibers, shoe impressions, tool marks. The problem is not only what evidence existed. The problem is what evidence was preserved, logged, stored, and followed. In later reporting, investigators actually described evidence issues. They said that there was disorganization and a failure in how all this material was handled. The theme's pretty consistent. It sounds like the case didn't really get the clean discipline evidence management that it needed. And of course, this was back in 1981. But that has consequences that last decades.
12:10
Tina remained missing for years, and then in April of 1984, skeletal remains were found in a remote area near Feather Falls. Now Tina, of course, had been there for several years, so she had to be identified through dental records. Another detail that fuels suspicion is there was a 911 call that suggests the remains were Tina's before the medical examiner actually confirmed it. And the recording of that call actually set in an envelope for years. And investigators say that they viewed the call as significant. Now when death investigators hear that, we automatically think about what kind of person calls like that. A person that's involved, a person who was told by someone that this happened, a person close enough to rumor to actually speak it out loud. Every one of those possibilities matter. But now we get to names that come up again and again. Martin or Marty Smartt lived nearby. And John Boubede associated with him. And in some reporting, they stayed in the area around the time of the murders.
Now over the years, both men were repeatedly discussed as primary suspects. But one of the most cited pieces of information is a letter attributed to Smartt that included the line about paying the price of love and buying it with four people's lives.Reporting in major outlets described that letter and stated investigators believed that it was overlooked. Another recurring detail is a reported confession to a counselor. Public reporting describes a counselor alleged that Smartt admitted involvement in the killings. Regardless of wording, the concept is consistent. A confession was reported, authorities were told, the investigators didn't do anything about it. So, a death investigator doesn't really treat a reported confession like a magic key. And many times, we're not even part of the investigation when this takes place. We've already done our scene visit, we've already taken our photos, and we don't always get a lot of information about what happens after the fact. But this reported confession, it's not enough on its own, but it is a lead that demands follow through. alibi testing, what was the opportunity, let's get a timeline, searches for physical corroboration, interviewing everyone around that suspect. But when the case is old and suspects are gone, a confession actually becomes harder to use. It still matters. But there's also a detail about a missing hammer. They reported that there was a hammer consistent with what Smartt described.
Now step back and look at the death investigation lens. The offender had to leave that cabin covered in blood. Close contact bludgeoning and stabbing are not neat. They're not clean. So, investigators ask, where did the blood go? Clothes are going to get discarded. Clothes are going to get washed. Clothes are going to get burned. And witnesses later referenced suspicious burnings, according to reporters. Now people also question the choice to leave three children alive in the back bedroom.
15:50
Death investigators also look at several possibilities. Maybe the offenders didn't know they were there. Maybe the offenders knew they were there and chose to spare them. Maybe the offenders were interrupted and fled. Maybe they focused on a specific target. Now in Katie, Tina's removal keeps pulling attention back to the idea that she was central to the offender's intent. Why didn't he kill her at the scene? Why did he take her, he or she? At least by the time the crime ended. They do believe that Tina was the initial central cause. Now at some point, the public also latched onto the idea of the botched investigation and potential conflicts. And media reporting described local frustration. It raised a lot of questions about relationships in the community. And ironically, the sheriff in that town had actually lived in the same cabin before Sue rented it. So, everyone kind of takes into account those relationships. And that kind of can shape which leads actually get pushed. And they shape who gets treated as a serious suspect, who gets benefit of the doubt. And they shape fear. And fear silences witnesses and delays tips and kills cases. I want to kind of anchor the timeline.
The murders occurred overnight, April 11th to April 12th in cabin 28. Sue Sharp, John and John's friend Dana were found dead. Tina was missing. Tina's remains found in 94 near Feather Falls identified by dental records. The person that called it in basically suggested the remains of Tina's before the identification was ever known. Cabin 28 was demolished in 2004. Now let's talk about what the death investigator does years later when a case goes cold. And many times, we do nothing, but we think about it. Like if we know that there was no killer found, this bothers us because we like closure. We like it to be finalized. Just the same as the victim's family. But a cold case review starts with the basics. What exists, what's missing, what was contaminated, what was tested, what was never tested.
Now, biological evidence must still exist even after decades if it's stored correctly. The bindings, the tape, the clothing, the bedding, the ligatures. But if it's stored incorrectly, it degrades. We all hope that when something like this happens, that it's stored well and modern forensic testing can pull profiles. But a death investigator also rebuilds the timeline from scratch, not just from rumors or documentaries or reports or dispatch logs or scene photos. The goal is really to test every theory. And this matters in Keddie because theories exploded over time. People argued the crime started as a confrontation between two adults. Some focus on domestic conflict near the cabin community. Some focus on drugs and parties and planned abduction. And one of the saddest realities in this case is that two widely discussed suspects, Smartt and Boubede, died years later. Boubede died in 88 and Smartt died in 2000. So that changes our path, right? Doesn't erase the truth, but it definitely alters prosecution. It shifts goals towards answering family questions and identifying witnesses who may have held back information.
19:48
Now I want to tell you the story in a way that reads like a real episode with a death investigation perspective. Imagine being the first deputy walking in and the air smells metallic. That's what blood smells like. It smells like metal. There are blood patterns that tell you this was not one strike and done. You see bindings, tape. You see the chaos of a fight that didn't end quickly. And your brain, you just try to do three jobs at once. The police are securing the scene. They've already determined that these people are deceased. They have called for their backup. We get our story. We find out one child is missing. But when we arrive, of course we document the body position before anyone moves anything. We document the ligatures, the knots, the tape, how the tape was torn, visible injuries without disturbing the body. Because in cases like this, we're gonna do trace to see if we can get any fibers or hair off of each body. And we look for defensive wounds. We look for hesitation marks and stabbing. We look for patterned injuries that match tools. And for petechiae, if we think there's strangulation, blunt force patterns that match a hammerhead. And then all these cases are traced. Again, when they get to the medical examiner's office and some places do it on scene, that they're going to collect fingernail scrapings and clothing and preserve the hands for prints or any kind of trace evidence, depending on protocol in whatever office. But these weren't really standardized practices back in 81. That's part of why these old cases frustrate us now. Because basic scene discipline existed, but modern DNA did not. So, imagine being the person who has to speak to the surviving children. They were actually sleeping feet away from the murder. Their stories might change, doesn't mean they're guilty, but they're traumatized. And a good investigator actually knows the difference between somebody trying to lie or someone in shock.
So, imagine being Sheila who found the bodies. The last time she saw her mom, everything was normal. And now it's a war zone. And that moment becomes her life and it becomes the family's life. It's a lifelong sentence for survivors. Now years later, when Tina's remains were found, there's a second scene. The recovery scene, bones were scattered and they didn't know who knew how to get there, who had vehicles, who had time. And then that 911 call, the one that pointed to Tina before the public confirmation.
This is the kind of detail that it feels small, but sometimes when people know too much, it raises a lot of curiosity. So, then the investigation reopened. So, outcomes boxes, evidence, missing logs, the letter with the language about the four lives, a confession report, a hammer, each piece looks like a thread, and then the job becomes pulling these threads without snapping them.
23:12
Now, Keddie stays unsolved, but it's not unsolved because it lacked horror. It stays unsolved because the early days of a case decide its future. And once a scene gets contaminated and a lead gets ignored, and evidence sits in an envelope, and relationships override discipline, time turns into the best defense an investigator ever gets. And this is why death investigators talk about the unseen deaths, because not every homicide looks like cabin 28, some look like an overdose, some look like an accident, some look like a fall. And some even look like illness, but a skilled investigator learns to respect these quiet scenes as much as loud ones. So, the same principle applies. This time the violence was loud, that the investigative failures were quiet, and that killed justice in this case.
It's so sad to look back and realize that if modern capabilities were present back then, that they could have found the person who committed these crimes. And the two men, like who knows, these two men, they're deceased now, will never be able to be convicted if they were guilty. I mean, did it have something to do with the sheriff having lived in the cabin before? Like, we don't know. So, this is kind of one reason why I loved up investigation, is putting the puzzle pieces together. I don't know what I would have done back then if I'd gone into a scene and seen all this stuff, and we didn't have the current technology. I mean, did they even do trace back then? I was born, so I wanna think it wasn't that long ago, but did they do trace? Because there's no DNA capability for testing. I'm sure that a lot of the cases that happened back then lack evidence because of that. And so, thank God now we have these capabilities because it is so hard to imagine having a family member killed and not having the resources to do the testing, to try and find the perpetrator and get justice for the victim.
But I want to tell y'all a little bit about some of the stuff I've got coming up. And I will be at the Beyond the Crime Convention in Albuquerque, New Mexico in April, and there I will be on the live podcast stage and also have my murder merch booth. And then in May, the 18th through the 22nd, we've got the Women in Podcasting cruise. So, if you're a woman who's interested in podcasting, this is where you need to be. Super educational and cram packed full of how to start your own podcast and stories from other podcasters and how they got started. CrimeCon is in Vegas, May 29th through 30th. Gosh, y'all, this year is crazy. And then in November, I've got the Crime Cruise. This is out of Fort Lauderdale to cause a male November 18th through 22nd. And so, I will be at all of these events, not to mention March 19th, the global forensic seminar that is a virtual live event. So be sure and go to my Facebook page, Pushing Up Lilies, and you can view a lot of these events and dates. If you're interested in forensics, the global event that's virtual is a great way to learn. There are so many different experts speaking on so many different forensic topics that you will definitely learn a lot.
27:11
Thank you so much for listening. I really appreciate your continued loyalty. And I appreciate all the shares that I get. Don't forget to subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and share with your friends. Until next week, y'all see you soon. Bye.
27:32
Thank you so much for joining me today on Pushing Up Lilies. If you like this podcast and would like to share with others, please do me a quick favor and leave a review on Apple Podcast. This helps to make the podcast more visible to the public. Thanks again for spending your time with me and be sure to visit me at pushinguplilies.com for merchandise and past episodes.