Episodes

  • 08 - National Airlines Flight 2511.
    Jun 29 2026
    National Airlines Flight 2511. National Airlines Flight 2511 was a United States domestic passenger flight from New York City to Miami, Florida. On January 6, 1960, the Douglas DC-6 serving the flight exploded in midair. The National Airlines aircraft was carrying 5 crew members and 29 passengers, all of whom perished. The Civil Aeronautics Board investigation concluded that the plane was brought down by a bomb made of dynamite. No criminal charges were ever filed, nor was the blame for the bombing ever determined, though a suicide bombing is suspected. The investigation remains open. One of the victims was retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Edward Orrick McDonnell, a Medal of Honor recipient and veteran of both World Wars. Flight history. National Airlines' New York-Miami route was usually flown by a Boeing 707 as Flight 601. On January 5, 1960, the 707 aircraft scheduled to fly to Miami was grounded due to cracks that were discovered in the cockpit windshield. The windshield replacement procedure would take eight hours to perform, so National Airlines transferred the passengers of Flight 601 to two propliner aircraft it had in reserve. Passengers were boarded on these two replacement planes on a first-come, first-served basis. Seventy-six passengers boarded a Lockheed L-188 Electra. This aircraft flew to Miami and arrived safely. The remaining 29 passengers boarded a Douglas DC-6B, which departed Idlewild Airport for Miami as Flight 2511. The crew consisted of stewardesses Mary O'Dell (24) and Valery Stewart (25), pilot Dale Southard (45), copilot Richard L. Hentzel (31), and flight engineer Robert R. Halleckson (34). The plane departed New York at 11:52 p.m. and was scheduled to arrive in Miami at 4:36 a.m. on January 6. The aircraft, registration N8225H, was described as being in good condition. It had four Pratt and Whitney R-2800 CB-16 engines and had accumulated 24,836 hours of flight time. 2511's flight plan called for it to fly south from New York to Wilmington, North Carolina, where it would continue south over the Atlantic Ocean. It would fly south 550 miles (890 km) over the ocean to Palm Beach, Florida. The crew maintained radio contact with National Airlines' radio controllers and air traffic control, reporting clouds and instrument flying conditions. The crew checked in with Wilmington Airport at 2:07 a.m., and later reported flying over the Carolina Beach radio beacon at 2:31 a.m. This was the last radio contact with the airplane. Crash and recovery. After losing contact with the DC-6 aircraft, National Airlines, the United States Coast Guard, and the United States Navy began an intensive search along the southeastern coast of the United States. The search was called off the following day, when National Airlines received word that there was a plane down in North Carolina. At about 2:45 a.m. a farmer, Richard Randolph, heard the sound of an engine cutting in and out, followed by tearing metal and an explosion. Later that morning, after his teenage son McArthur Randolph found airplane wreckage in one of his father's fields, Richard Randolph drove to Bolivia, North Carolina, which had the nearest phone. He called Wilmington Airport to report the downed plane at approximately 7:00 a.m. When Highway Patrol officers responded, he led them to the crash site. Bodies and wreckage were scattered over an area of 20 acres (8 ha) covering farm fields, marshland, and pine forests. During the first day of search and rescue, investigators located 32 bodies of the 34 persons on board. One of the missing bodies was later found at the main crash site. The remaining body was found at Snow's Marsh, approximately 16 miles (26 km) from the main site. Initial reports speculated that the aircraft had disintegrated in mid-flight. One newspaper reporter indicated that the largest piece of wreckage he observed was a portion of the wing. A fragment of aluminum, believed to be a piece of the airplane's skin, was found on Kure Beach, 25 miles (40 km) from the rest of the wreckage. Investigations. The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), part of the Department of Transportation, were the primary investigators into the crash of Flight 2511. The wreckage of the DC-6 was taken to a hangar at nearby Wilmington Airport, where the fuselage was reassembled on a wood-and-chicken-wire frame. Investigators recovered approximately 90% of the fuselage, which was then assembled on the frame in the Wilmington hangar. Investigators identified the point of origin of the disintegration as an area immediately ahead of the leading edge of the aircraft's right wing. The material recovered from Kure Beach, including a portion of the wing fillet, was from this general area. Investigators did not recover material from an irregular, triangularly shaped area positioned above the leading edge and extending forward ahead of the wing. The bodies were taken to the local high school gymnasium to await autopsy and ...
    Show More Show Less
    16 mins
  • 07 - Murders of Harry and Harriette Moore.
    Jun 29 2026
    Murders of Harry and Harriette Moore. Harry T. Moore and his wife, Harriette V. S. Moore, were pioneer activists and leaders of the early Civil Rights Movement in the United States and became the first martyrs of the movement. On the night of Christmas, December 25, 1951, a bomb that had been planted under the bedroom floor of the Moores' home in Mims, Florida, exploded. They had celebrated their 25th wedding anniversary earlier that day. Harry died in the ambulance in transit from the attack, and Harriette died from her injuries nine days later, on January 3, 1952. Their deaths were the first assassination of any activist to occur during the Civil Rights Movement and the only time that a husband and wife were killed during the history of the movement. Background. Harry Moore and Harriette Simms married on December 25, 1926, and moved into the Simms' family home the following fall. Harry was an educator, and Harriette was a former teacher turned insurance broker. In 1927, Harry was promoted to the position of principal at the local Titusville Colored School. The city's school system was racially segregated, like many others in the country at the time. Harry taught the school's ninth grade (the school taught grades one to nine), and he also supervised the team of teachers at the school. The school was closed early his first year by the local school board just six months into the year, as part of the local school system's systemic discrimination against black children. The Moores had their first daughter in 1928 and moved into their own home with an acre of land given to them by Harriette's parents. They gave birth to their second daughter in 1930. Harriette returned to her career in education the following year and later began working as a teacher for the same school as Harry. In 1934, Harry founded the Brevard County, Florida, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) chapter. He later served as the NAACP's first Executive Secretary in the state of Florida. The NAACP chapter worked towards achieving equal pay for equal work for teachers of any race, fought to get lynchings prosecuted, and attempted to register black voters in the region. Moore's activism was highly controversial in the local white-dominated county. In 1946, it resulted in the firings of Harry and Harriette from their teaching jobs by state authorities. Harry then became a full-time employee of the NAACP. Murder. On the night of December 25, 1951, the Moores finished celebrating Christmas and their 25th wedding anniversary. When they later retired to their bedroom for the evening, a bomb exploded, injuring Harry and Harriette but leaving their daughter (who was at home at the time, the other being in a different location) unharmed. The improvised explosive device, which was made from dynamite, had been placed directly under the Moores' bedroom floor. The Moores were rushed to the nearest hospital that would treat African-Americans in Sanford, Florida, a 29.8 miles (48.0 km) drive by car. Harry died while being transported; his wife, Harriette, lived to see her husband buried before she died nine days later from her injuries. Investigations and motive. Over the years, a number of motives have been suggested for the Moores' deaths. All of them share a common theme — retribution against Harry Moore for his civil rights activities. — Charlie Crist, 35th Attorney General of the State of Florida. Since the night of the explosion in 1951, five separate criminal investigations have been initiated and completed. The first investigation was headed by the FBI, began on the night of the explosion, and concluded in 1955. The second investigation was a joint investigation by the Brevard County Sheriff's Office and Brevard County State Attorney's Office in 1978. The third investigation took place in 1991 by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). In 2004, a fourth investigation was commenced by the Florida Attorney General's Office of Civil Rights. In 2008, the FBI again investigated the Moore homicides as part of the Department of Justice's "Cold Case Initiative". In total, the five criminal investigations revealed evidence implicating four subjects in the bombing. The four subjects were known to be high-ranking members within the Ku Klux Klan in the central region of Florida. The first of the four, Earl J. Brooklyn, was a Klansman with a reputation for being exceedingly violent and described as "a renegade" after being expelled from a Klavern of the Ku Klux Klan in Georgia for engaging in unsanctioned acts of violence. Brooklyn reportedly was in possession of floor plans of the Moore home and was said to be recruiting volunteers to assist in the bombing. The second subject, Tillman H. "Curley" Belvin, was also reported to be a violent member of the Klan and a close friend of Brooklyn. Joseph N. Cox, another Klansman, was implicated in the bombing by a fourth co-conspirator, Edward L. ...
    Show More Show Less
    9 mins
  • 06 - Arthur "Buddy" Schumacher.
    Jun 29 2026
    Arthur "Buddy" Schumacher.
    Arthur Louis "Buddy" Schumacher (September 2, 1916 – July 1925) was an 8-year-old from Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, who was murdered in 1925. His body was discovered on September 12, 1925. Two suspects were interviewed in connection with the case, but it remains unsolved.

    Early life.
    Buddy was born on September 2, 1916, to Arthur "Art" Schumacher and Florence May Zapp (Armstrong) Schumacher. He had an older sister, Jeanette Alice, who was born on April 11, 1915. Buddy attended Lincoln Elementary School in Wauwatosa.

    Disappearance.
    Schumacher went missing on July 24, 1925. He left his house with some neighborhood boys about 9 a.m. and never returned. He was last seen by three of his friends after they hopped off a freight train they had jumped to get a ride to a nearby swimming hole. For seven weeks, the community and state searched desperately to find the boy until his body was found just a mile from his house with his clothing torn and a handkerchief shoved down his throat. The police pursued several promising leads, but to no avail.
    In September 1925, two of Schumacher's friends identified Edward Vreeland as a man who had chased them on the day of Schumacher's disappearance. The two boys said they ran away, but Buddy remained. He was never seen alive again after that day. Vreeland had been arrested as a vagrant two days after Schumacher disappeared, taken into custody in the woods where the boy was last seen. He was questioned at the time in relation to the disappearance of the boy but professed ignorance of any connection with the case. In November 1925, 21-year-old William Brandt, who was serving time at the Minnesota State Prison for murdering a young boy in St. Paul under similar circumstances, confessed to the killing of Schumacher, but there were discrepancies between known facts and the statements he made. During their investigation, detectives discovered that at least four other children had been molested or attacked near Wauwatosa.

    Aftermath.
    Buddy was the subject of a nonfiction book, Murder in Wauwatosa: The Mysterious Death of Buddy Schumacher, written by former Wauwatosa resident Paul J. Hoffman that was published in 2012 by The History Press. Hoffman's father, Raymond Hoffman, purchased a house at 8118 Hillcrest Drive in Wauwatosa in 1969 from Buddy's father that the Schumachers had moved into about two years after Buddy died. Raymond Hoffman owned the house until 2004.


    Wikipedia: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License.

    This episode includes AI-generated content.
    Show More Show Less
    3 mins
  • 05 - William Goebel.
    Jun 29 2026
    William Goebel. William Justus Goebel (January 4, 1856 – February 3, 1900) was an American Democratic politician who served as the 34th governor of Kentucky for four days, having been sworn in on his deathbed a day after being shot by an assassin. Goebel is the only sitting state governor in United States history to die by assassination. Goebel was born to Wilhelm and Augusta Goebel (née Groenkle), German immigrants from Hanover. He studied at the Hollingsworth Business College in the mid-1870s and became an apprentice at John W. Stevenson's law firm. While Goebel lacked the social qualities like public speaking that are common with politicians, various authors referred to him as an intellectual man. He served in the Kentucky Senate, campaigning for populist causes like railroad regulation, which won him many allies and supporters. In 1895, Goebel engaged in a duel with John Lawrence Sandford, a former Confederate general staff officer turned cashier. According to the witnesses, both men then drew their pistols, but no one was sure who fired first. Sandford was killed; Goebel pleaded self-defense and was acquitted. During the 1899 Kentucky gubernatorial election, Goebel divided his party with his political tactics to win the nomination for governorship at a time when Kentucky Republicans were gaining strength, having elected the party's first governor four years previously. These dynamics led to a close contest between Goebel and William S. Taylor. In the politically chaotic climate that resulted, Goebel was declared as having won the election, but was assassinated and died after three days in office. Everyone charged in connection with the murder was either acquitted or eventually pardoned, and the identity of his assassin remains unknown. Early life. Heritage and career. Wilhelm Justus Goebel was born January 4, 1856, to Wilhelm and Augusta Goebel (née Groenkle)—immigrants from Hanover, Germany—in Pennsylvania. The eldest of four children, he was two months premature and weighed less than 3 pounds (1.4 kg). His father served as a private in Company B, 82nd Pennsylvania Infantry Regiment, during the American Civil War, and Goebel's mother raised her children alone, teaching them much about their German heritage. Wilhelm spoke German until the age of six, but he embraced American culture, adopting the English spelling of his name as "William". After being discharged from the army in 1863, Goebel's father moved his family to Covington, Kentucky. Goebel attended school in Covington and was then apprenticed to a jeweler in Cincinnati, Ohio. After a brief time at Hollingsworth Business College in mid 1870s, he became an apprentice in the law firm of John W. Stevenson, who had served as governor of Kentucky from 1867 to 1871. Goebel eventually became Stevenson's partner and executor of his estate. Goebel graduated from Cincinnati Law School in 1877, and enrolled at the Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, before joining the practice of Kentucky state representative John G. Carlisle. He then rejoined Stevenson in Covington in 1883, after the death of Stevenson's previous partner. Personal characteristics. According to author James C. Klotter, Goebel was not known as a particularly genial person in public. He belonged to few social organizations and greeted none but his closest friends with a smile or handshake. He was rarely linked romantically with a woman and was the only governor of Kentucky who never married. Journalist Irvin S. Cobb remarked, "I never saw a man who, physically, so closely suggested the reptilian as this man did." Others commented on his "contemptuous" lips, "sharp" nose, and "humorless" eyes. Goebel was not a gifted public speaker, often eschewing flowery imagery and relying on his deep, powerful voice and forceful delivery to drive home his points. Klotter wrote, "When coupled to somewhat demagogic appeals and to an occasional phrase that stirred emotions, this delivery made for an effective speech, but never more than an average one." While lacking in the social qualities common to politicians, one characteristic that served Goebel well in the political arena was his intellect. Goebel was well-read, and supporters and opponents both conceded that his mental prowess was impressive. Cobb concluded that he had never been more impressed with a man's intellect than he had been with Goebel's. Political career. Kentucky Senate. In 1887, James William Bryan vacated his seat in the Kentucky Senate to pursue the office of lieutenant governor. Goebel decided to seek election to the vacant seat representing Covington. He campaigned on the platform of railroad regulation and labor causes. Like Stevenson, he insisted on the right of the people to control chartered corporations. The Union Labor Party had risen to power in the area with a platform similar to Goebel's. However, while Goebel had to stick close to his allies in the Democratic Party, the Union Labor Party ...
    Show More Show Less
    20 mins
  • 04 - Joseph Hedley.
    Jun 29 2026
    Joseph Hedley. Joseph Hedley (also known as Joe the Quilter, 1749 or 1750 – 3 January 1826) was a Quilter from Northumberland. During his life, he was renowned for his quality of craftsmanship, with his work being exported as far as America. He lived his later years on parish relief. His life was widely recorded in newspapers across the country and is most remembered due to his brutal murder, which occurred on 3 January 1826. His murderers were not found despite a large reward being offered, and the culprits remain unknown. Life. Joseph Hedley was born at some point in 1749 or 1750 in Northumberland. Little is known about his early life except what scant information is given in his obituaries, which are more interested in contrasting the peacefulness of his late life with his grisly murder. It is known that he trained as a tailor, probably taking an apprenticeship in the craft. However, for an unknown reason, he gave up the craft for that of Quilt making. While much of the nation's quilting industry was in decline during the second half of the 18th century, in part due to the Industrial Revolution, Northumberland quilters in general and Joe the Quilter in particular managed to buck this trend. During his life he was known as a highly skilled craftsman, designing and quilting in both linen and cotton, with extremely fine details executed down to a quarter of an inch. Many of his designs show a propensity towards flowers, chains and diamond shapes, becoming especially associated with a pattern known as 'Old Joe's chain'. Such was his reputation that he created quilts for customers as far away as America and Ireland. In 1773, at the age of 23, Hedley married Isabel Thompson, a woman 25 years his elder, and moved into a typical 2 roomed 'squatter' cottage in Warden Parish, called "Homer's House". The cottage was on the road between Warden church and Chollerford, overlooking the Tyne. The Hedleys kept a small garden, containing vegetables and herbs and had kept a variety of animals. As Isabel aged, Joseph spent many of his prime years caring for her and when she died he was left almost destitute. He was generally well-liked by the local community but his seclusion made him liable with it being reported that he would have starved during a severe snowstorm in 1823, had it not been for a Hexham clergyman wading through snow drifts to bring him food when other attempts to reach him had failed. Murder. On the evening of Thursday, 3 January 1826 he was murdered in his home by an unknown attacker. Hedley was 76 years old. That afternoon he had been at Walwick Grange and had received charitable aid from the farmer there. During the evening a variety of visitors called on him and all recall him being in good health, with the last person to see him alive being a peddler from Stamfordham asking for directions. An hour later when a Mr. Smith of Haughton Castle rode past he noted Joe's cottage was dark and silent. Despite passers-by and herdsman noting the strangeness of the cottage being locked up and silent over the next few days, it wasn't until the Saturday that further inquiry was undertaken. On the afternoon of the 7th alarmed neighbours burst open the locked door to Hedley's home. His body was found in a small inner room with more than 40 wounds inflicted to his face and neck. There seemed to have been a struggle outside the cottage as his clogs and some scraps of cloth were discovered on the other side of the road, with some at the time theorising this showed that Hedley had been attempting to flee to the nearest residence, Wall Mill. There were also signs of struggle inside the cottage and several garden tools were suspected to have been used as murder weapons by those at the scene. Little motive could be discerned for such a violent act. The only possible explanation seems to be that his murderers believed rumours that Hedley had some secret fortune despite the fact that Joe was known to be receiving parish aid. This interpretation is backed up by the fact that the perpetrators appear to have rummaged through the old man's drawers, evidently in search of something. On the other hand, Robert Hill argues that personal motive should be considered because of details such as the clock face being smashed, something he points out would not have been done in the struggle and instead a purposeful attack against Hedley's identity. He proposes as a possibility for the murderer a neighbour named William Herdman who had been an early suspect. However, he was discounted by contemporaries because he was, in the words of The Newcastle Chronicle, "a poor and simple creature of rather imbecile intellect". A 100 guineas reward was put up by the local parish and a full pardon was promised by Robert Peel for any accomplice who came forward. Despite this, all efforts to find the culprits came to nought. Several arrests were made in the immediate aftermath but no one was prosecuted, and from time to ...
    Show More Show Less
    6 mins
  • 03 - Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 3).
    Jun 28 2026
    Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 3). In literature. The murder occasioned the witty and cruel epigram by the contemporary Neapolitan poet and humanist, Jacopo Sannazaro about Pope Alexander VI. The poem plays on the apostolic title of the pope as fisher of men alluding to the scandal when his son's body was dragged from the river: Piscatorem hominum ne te non Sexte putemus / Piscaris natum retibus ecce tuum. Lest we do not think you are not a fisher of men, Sixth, you fish for your own son with nets. — Jacopo Sannazaro, Epigrammata. The most important Renaissance literary work remembering the event was a traditional Hispanic ballad (romance) entitled Muerte del duque de Gandía (Death of the Duke of Gandía). The original version was in all probability composed right after the murder, and belonged to the group of news-bearing ballads dealing with tragic contemporary events. The ballad survived in five different 16th-century printed editions. Even the oldest version, from a chapbook printed in Burgos around 1530, appeared more than thirty years after Juan's death, which suggests that the ballad had previously been transmitted by oral tradition for a long time. The remaining versions were included in chapbooks printed around 1540 in Valladolid and in Valencia around 1560, and two famous songbooks that appeared in Valencia and Granada (in 1573 and 1588 respectively). The ballad was apparently popular on the Iberian Peninsula, and retained its relevance for more than a century. Other ballads of this kind usually disappeared quickly from the press. The romance portrayed Alexander VI as a loving father worrying about his son, and later as an example of Christian charity who forgives the murderers and even absolves them. Juan is described as a young nobleman widely mourned by the papal court, who "did not deserve such harm", although some versions refer to his sins. The murderers remain unnamed although one songbook version claims that they have already fled beyond Lombardy. The main motif of the ballad is the finding of the body, which the text attributes to the same boatman who witnessed the murder. The rich clothing and the horrific wounds of the victim are emphasized. Although some researchers interpreted the ballad as anti-Borgia propaganda, a reading of the text does not really support such a view, in fact there is an obvious sympathy for the grieving pope and his murdered son. The oral tradition of the ballad died out on the Iberian Peninsula but lived on in the Sephardic diaspora. A very large number of versions in Judaeo-Spanish were recorded among the Jewish communities in the Eastern Mediterranean and in Morocco. In these late versions all the historical references to the Borgias and Rome were lost, and Giovanni Borgia was transformed into a "golden duke" whose corpse was discovered in the sea. In some versions he was murdered by a fisherman. In this way the murder of the Duke of Gandía became a Jewish folk tale. In fiction. The crimes and tragedy of the Borgias became a frequent literary topic during the Romantic era. The black legend was created by Renaissance pamphlet writers and chroniclers, but 19th-century poets and novelists made it widely known to the European reading public. From the beginning, the murder of the Duke of Gandía by his jealous brother was a crucial element. The fratricide was mentioned in Massimo d'Azeglio's 1833 historical novel, Ettore Fieramosca, a highly popular literary expression of Italian patriotism in the Risorgimento era. D'Azeglio made Cesare Borgia an antihero who, among his many other crimes, threw the corpse of his brother into the Tiber, "washed off the blood-stains from the pommel of his saddle, and disappeared in a dark lane". Nikolaus Lenau, one of the most important German poets of the Late Romantic era dedicated a song, "Vater und Sohn" to Giovanni Borgia's murder in his 1837 epic, Savonarola. The song describes an imagined late-night conversation between Alexander VI and his son, Cesare, during which he tells the pope that he killed his brother. The young duke is not sleeping in the arms of a prostitute, as his doting father thinks: Diesmahl hat eine alte, kühle, / Unsaubre Dirne ihn umfasst; / Er hält auf ihrem schlechten Pfühle vom Liebestaumel tiefe Rast. This time an old, cold, unclean whore has embraced him; and he is taking a deep rest on her bad pillows from the madness of love. — Nikolaus Lenau, Savonarola. The old whore Cesare is speaking about is the Tiber, and in this moment Alexander VI, the great sinner "is shocked to see that he has fathered an even greater one". The murder was recounted by Alexandre Dumas in his 1840 novel, The Borgias (although Giovanni Borgia is referred to as Francesco) which was published in his Celebrated Crimes series. One of Dumas' early historical novels, it was based on documentary research, probably conducted with the collaboration of Pier Angelo ...
    Show More Show Less
    13 mins
  • 02 - Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 2).
    Jun 28 2026
    Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 2). Suspects. In his speech at the consistory of 19 June, Pope Alexander VI explicitly exonerated some of the suspects. It is not known at whose hands he met his death. It has been stated that the Lord of Pesaro devised it, which we do not believe, or the Prince of Squillace, his brother, which is utterly false. We are certain, too, that the Duke of Urbino had no hand in it. God forgive the guilty, whoever he was. At the time, it was presumed that Alexander VI was aware of the identity of the real culprits but saw no opportunity to punish them immediately. "This morning I was told by a trustworthy person that at this time His Beatitude has very close news of the truth, but he will pretend otherwise to surprise the authors in their sleep, as they are very important people and of high status", the Florentine envoy, Alessandro Braccio reported on 23 June. The investigation lasted more than a year but it was concluded without results. The murder was never avenged, which contributed to the spread of wild rumours. Eventually the unsolved case became part of the black legend of the Borgia, and regarded as one of the most mysterious crimes in history. The main suspects: - The most obvious suspects were the Orsinis revenging the death of Virginio Orsini at the beginning of the year in a Neapolitan prison. This ancient Roman family was hostile to the Borgias, and they had fought a war against Alexander VI. They defeated the Duke of Gandía on the battlefield, but the pope's plan to carve out a principality in Italy for his son still posed a threat to the family's fortune. Immediately after the murder, the Milanese envoy wrote that all signs point to the Orsini's guilt, but the pope is acting with great caution. In December Sanudo reported that "the pope was plotting to ruin the Orsini, because they certainly had his son, the Duke of Gandía killed", however, the Venetians intervened that the moment was not suitable. Several sources testify that Alexander VI remained determined to exact revenge on the family but political circumstances prevented him to carry out his plan. - Ascanio Sforza, Vice-Chancellor of the Holy Roman Church was one of the prime suspects in the period following the murder. At the time the relations between the Sforzas and the pope were tense. The cardinal tried to mediate in the conflict between his cousin, Giovanni Sforza and the Borgias, and immediately before the murder his valet called the Duke of Gandia a bastard during a quarrel and the man was subsequently killed. According to Burchard, the Duke of Gandía took leave of his brother, Cesare near the vice-chancellor's palace on the fateful evening. Ascanio Sforza did not attend the consistory of 19 June. The Spanish ambassador, Garcilaso de la Vega apologised for his absence by saying that he was worried about the rumours accusing him of being behind the murder. Pope Alexander VI immediately absolved him from the charge: "God forbid that I should suspect him, for I hold him as a brother." In a letter to his brother on 20 June, Ascanio Sforza admitted that his people were suspected: "It is said that some of my people may have done it on account of the recent quarrel with the duke". In the following months, relations between the cardinal and the pope fluctuated, meetings were held, but suspicion reared its head again among the Spaniards in Rome, and during the summer Sforza thought advisable to spend more time away from the city. At the time the Venetian envoy wrote that everyone in Rome believes that Ascanio Sforza ordered the murder. - Antonio Maria Pico della Mirandola was among the early suspects. The Florentine envoy, Alessandro Braccio mentioned that the city police searched all the houses that the duke had been visiting in secret to question family members and maids, including the house of Count Antonio della Mirandola that was located not far from the place where Giovanni Borgia was murdered and where his body was thrown into the river. Mirandola "had a very shapely daughter but of very good fame", Braccio added. It seems that the envoy alluded to a love affair between the Duke of Gandía and the girl, or at least to a rumor circulating in the city. The Ferrarese envoy claimed that the murder was organized by Mirandola and Cardinal Ascanio Sforza, and "the said count was already arrested by the pope". Since Mirandola was never mentioned again, the charge must have been dismissed. - Suspicions later centred on Giovanni's brother, Cesare Borgia. Some argue that a personal rivalry existed between them and, with Giovanni's death, Cesare was allowed to leave the Church as he wished, taking his brother's place as a man-at-arms and eventually the prospective ruler of a Borgia principality. The claim that Cesare was his brother's murderer is first found in a despatch of the Ferrarese ambassador at Venice: "I recently learned how the death of the Duke of Candia was caused by ...
    Show More Show Less
    17 mins
  • 01 - Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 1).
    Jun 28 2026
    Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía. (part 1).Giovanni Borgia, 2nd Duke of Gandía (Spanish: Juan de Borja; Valencian: Joan Borja; c. 1476 – 14 June 1497) was the second child of Pope Alexander VI and Vannozza dei Cattanei and a member of the House of Borgia. He was the brother of Cesare, Gioffre, and Lucrezia Borgia. Giovanni Borgia was the pope's favourite son, and Alexander VI granted him important positions and honours. He was murdered in Rome on 14 June 1497. The case remained unsolved and is still considered one of the most notorious scandals of the Borgia era. Early life. Giovanni Borgia was born in Rome around 1476 to Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia and his mistress, Vannozza dei Cattanei. He was the second son of the couple, after the firstborn Cesare. No exact birth dates are known for him and his brother, and Giovanni was long thought to be the couple's eldest son, but modern research agrees that he must have been younger than Cesare. Cesare and Giovanni were brought up together in a house provided by their father, probably supervised by his confidant, Adriana de Mila. An instrument of 29 January 1483 removed the guardianship of Giovanni from his mother's family and gave it to his older half-brother, Pier Luigi and another relative, Otto Borgia. Pier Luigi died in September 1488 and by his will, Giovanni succeeded him as the 2nd Duke of Gandía. The duchy was located in the Kingdom of Valencia, the Borgia's ancestral homeland, and it was cobbled together by Rodrigo Borgia in 1485 with the help of his patron, King Ferdinand II of Aragon. A marriage contract was written on 13 December 1488 for Giovanni and María Enríquez de Luna, the king's first cousin, who had been betrothed to his brother, Pier Luigi. Because Giovanni was only twelve years old, the wedding was postponed. The situation changed four years later when Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia was elected pope as Alexander VI. A political alliance between the Crown of Aragon and the papacy made the long-planned union more urgent for both sides. Years in Spain. In August 1493, Alexander VI sent the then-17 year-old Giovanni to Spain equipped with a large amount of textiles, jewels, silver and portable goods. "He left Rome loaded with loot and was expected to return next year to make more," wrote the ambassador from Mantua, Giovanni Lucido Cattanei. Giovanni was received with great ceremony by the Catholic Monarchs in the Royal Palace of Barcelona. His wedding to María Enríquez was celebrated at the end of September 1493. Initially there were rumours, to the great dismay of the pope, that the marriage was not consummated. Alexander VI rebuked his son in a letter dated 30 November 1493, and repeatedly advised him to be a good husband. Eventually, María Enríquez gave birth to two children. Juan de Borja y Enríquez (later the 3rd Duke of Gandía) was born on 10 November 1494. A daughter, Isabel de Borja y Enríquez, was born on 15 January 1497, seven months after Giovanni's departure to Rome; she grew up to be abbess of Santa Clara in Gandía with the name Francisca de Jesús. Giovanni Borgia spent three years in Spain where he kept a sizeable court of 130 noblemen and their entourage. The pope was constantly worried about his reckless spending, and urged his son to live more moderately and expand his estate. Alexander VI was a keen businessman, and the region around Gandía was a major centre of sugarcane production where buying up lands of the cash-strapped local nobility was a smart plan. In this regard, Giovanni, like his brother before, simply acted as his father's manager in the duchy but his acquisitions were limited. Alexander hoped that his son would receive large estates in the recently conquered Kingdom of Granada and become an important figure at the Spanish court. However, the Catholic Monarchs did not heap any more favours on the duke. Queen Isabella was particularly annoyed that the pope was so focused on the promotion of his children, and refused to provide any assistance in this regard. Still, the pope was relentless in this pursuit: he managed to get the new King of Naples, Alfonso II, to grant the fiefdom of Tricarico and the counties of Carinola, Claramonte and Lauria, worth 12,000 ducats a year, to Giovanni on the occasion of his coronation in May 1494. However, the subsequent Italian campaign of Charles VIII of France made these Neapolitan estates unavailable for the Borgias. The young man was already homesick in 1494, and wrote letters to his father to send ships to take him back to Rome. "Each day seems like a year to me in the delay of those ships which His Holiness has written in recent days he will send soon", he wrote to his brother, Cesare. At this point, Giovanni Borgia was effectively a pawn in the hands of the Catholic Monarchs, as his presence in Spain guaranteed the alliance between the House of Aragon and the papacy against the French. Captain General of the Church. The Duke of Gandía was...
    Show More Show Less
    20 mins