Bloodline Detectives - Episode 7 - Motorway Killer | Forensic Files

I'm Nancy Grace, and this is "Bloodline Detectives." A brick flies through the air and smashes the windshield
of a moving truck. Its impact does the unthinkable. The brick would not only devastate a family
but empower law enforcement in a way never seen before. In this case, there are no obvious leads to pursue,
and what the police experimented with to solve it would leave ripple effects across the world.
In this episode, we travel across the Atlantic to England to the town of Surrey, not far from London.
The year is 2003. The incident is shocking, and the killer is faceless. Is there a premeditated motive, or is this
a completely senseless random act of violence? The case will end in a landmark moment,
one of the very first cases solved by the bloodline detectives using a combination
of a community swab campaign, testing relatives, and a new forensic science called familial DNA.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): March 21, 2003, police are called to a traffic incident
on a motorway south of London. What they find is shocking. They opened up the cab and saw that the driver was dead,
slumped to one side, still in the driver's seat. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): It's not just
a random death, it's murder. Someone out there had killed him, and they were still walking with not a care in the world,
really. It was this overwhelming feeling that you need to get some revenge. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): An immediate search
for the murderer is a dead end. It's on a motorway. You know, that's not normally the place detectives work.
They are at a dead end, which happens in these cases. And I honestly didn't think that they would catch anybody.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): As a last attempt to find the killer, investigators turn to a new groundbreaking DNA technology.
This was the first case of its type in the world to be solved through an organized
familial search. Without familial DNA, this case would never have been detected.
This is the story of how police gambled on a revolutionary technique called familial DNA analysis,
and how the bloodline detectives would use it to get a conviction for one of the very first times.
We were an ordinary family plunged into a murder inquiry. [THEME MUSIC] NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Just outside London, England
March 21, 2003, it's 3:30 AM. On the side of a busy freeway just south of London,
police find the driver of a 40-ton truck dead behind the wheel. As the senior investigating officer for the major crime
team, I'm on call. So I got a phone call about 5 o'clock in the morning that said that there'd been this incident,
that there was a lorry that was parked on the side of the road or off the motorway.
And originally they thought it was a road traffic accident. But on closer inspection, it seemed that there was something
a little bit more suspicious. When they opened up the cab and saw that the driver was dead,
they realized that there was something not right. And then they noticed that there was a smash to the windscreen,
a hole in the windscreen. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The incident is particularly unusual for a quiet British town
like Camberley, a town where people feel safe. Overall, Camberley was a fairly nice town to live.
The normal sort of vehicle crime, house burglaries. But compared to other areas, certainly violent crime
wasn't a massive problem. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Senior British investigating officers are soon involved.
We start to document the scene with photographs. We start to take forensic examination.
And then very quickly we discover that there is a brick, that clearly shouldn't be
in the cab, behind the seats. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Officers identify the victim
as 53-year-old Michael Little. And soon his family is waking to the news of his tragic death.
That morning, my alarm went off, and I'm thinking, it's a bit strange he's not home.
So I tried to call him. Couldn't get any answer. I tried his lorry phone, couldn't get any answer.
I was getting more and more worried. And I'm going, "something's happened to him.
I know something's happened to him." I was getting myself ready for work. And on the news, they said there had been an incident on the N3,
and that the motorway was closed. And I don't know why, but something clicked. And we actually found out by the place it was Mike,
and he'd been found dead in the cab. Later, the autopsy told us that he had died of a fatal heart attack caused by a blow to the chest.
The brick was the fatal blow. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Police believe what was the scene of an accident has now
become the scene of a murder. Investigators now begin their detailed inquiries into the murder of Michael Little.
So the brick looked like it's been thrown from a place of height, because of the way
it went into the vehicle. So potentially, if someone had thrown that from the side of the road, it would
have been quite difficult to get the trajectory for it to come in at height. And so the most logical thing for us
to conclude, that the only place that you could get that height from would have been a footbridge that
was about a half a mile back. With that, it must have been awful for a detective.
No CCTV cameras, no idea of who might have been crossing there. The one thing they did know was the very likely probability
the culprit, whoever was involved in this, was probably local. We're looking for a male between a certain ages
to start off with. We were going to extend that if we didn't identify the person within that.
And we had geographical areas from the crime scene, which we would start off with the nearer ones
and then move out. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Police know they have to track down the person or people responsible,
and they must move fast. Mike wasn't found for four or five hours after the event, by which time
the culprit is long since gone. So how on earth are they going to find anybody? We were an ordinary family plunged into a murder inquiry.
And the bloodline detectives in England will exploit an extraordinary new science
to try and bring Mike Little's family the answers they need. In 2003, police in England don't know it yet,
but soon they'll be using the very latest science to solve a murder. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The body
of Michael Little is found in the cab of a truck in the early hours, March 21. Police at first presume he died of natural causes.
But a suspicious hole in the window of the cab and a brick found behind the driver's seat
lead them very quickly to question their first conclusions. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It came through the truck window, hit him in the sternum, caused massive internal trauma,
which led to his death. But one of the problems with this investigation is, it's on a motorway.
You know, that's not normally the place detectives work. There's a lack of witnesses.
And the location, it was going to be difficult for the investigation team to make any headway with.
Someone out there had killed him, and they were still walking, enjoying their life,
doing what they were doing, with not a care in the world, really. And I hated that thought.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): 53-year-old Michael Little is from Hornchurch in Essex, a county
in the Southeast of England. Well, Michael Little was a family-orientated man, had lived in London or the east of London all of his life.
And he was a lorry driver for Ford in Dagenham. He was a larger than life character.
He had a terrific sense of humor. He loved his family. He would do anything for his family.
Very, very proud dad. Very proud dad. Mike was very much a boy's boy. He ended up going into the army at 15.
And he was in the army until he was 21. And it was then he got the job at Ford's.
Obviously, he learned to drive HGV vehicles in the army. And it was a way of him utilizing that skill.
And when that job offer came up, it was natural for him to go for it. And he was meticulous about driving.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Michael was loved and respected by all who knew him. He kept me in check, certainly through my teenage years.
And I used to go out with Mike in his lorry as well. He used to take a route through the city of London
every now and then. And it was amazing, being up that high with all the traffic.
You sometimes wonder how he used to use to get through the gaps in the traffic, taking that huge lorry through the streets of London.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Michael's death causes heartbreak for his family and friends.
I couldn't believe he was gone. I thought, no, he's not. He's going to walk through that door any minute.
I know he is. He's just going to he's going to walk through the door. But he didn't.
We had to go and deliver the news to my mom. We told her that Mike had been killed.
And to this day, I've not heard a scream like it. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The investigation
into Michael's murder is now fully active and centered on the British town of Camberley, about 30 miles
from Central London. I wrote the strategy as a murder investigation. And this would have been what's called a Cat A murder, which
means that the person that potentially committed the crime had no connection with the person that had
been the victim of the crime. And clearly there's things that need to be done early on in the investigation.
And then as the investigation progresses and unfolds, you move in different directions as to where
the evidence takes you. Motorway cameras confirmed it was in the early hours of the morning, because it sees the articulated lorry go down
the motorway. And then it sort of sees it pull over to one side, to the left hand side.
So we've got a rough idea when it happened. The next thing is, who was about when it happened.
Police, confident that whoever was involved was local, set up a camp in the town center,
where they asked for witnesses. They try to find people who might have just possibly been
in that area, somehow nearby at the time, to see if anybody saw anything that would have
helped them with their inquiry. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): With no immediate leads to follow,
investigators turn to science and began to use forensic techniques. Our initial thoughts were, well, it's a brick.
What can we get from a brick? And I remember thinking, well, you know, there's not going to be much forensic evidence here.
But I think the important thing is, is that it was preserved in such a way that when it went to the laboratory,
they were able to tell us that there was some material on there that they believed
to be skin, that they thought they could extract DNA profile from. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Now they
focus on finding the original source of the brick. The road that leads from Camberley down to the beginning
of the footbridge is a long private road with expensive houses. So we centered our investigation around that long road.
And very quickly we were able to establish that the brick was of a certain type, and that that brick
had come from a building site which was in the long private road. Somebody was having an extension built.
They had particular kind of bricks that they were using, so it was quite easy for us to establish that the brick had
come from that site. And we also had a strategy which has worked in the past on several investigations,
is to look for other crimes. So you have a serious crime, but you look within the 24 hours
either side of that crime for other crimes. And sometimes crimes connect. So people do one thing, and it leads
them on to do another thing. And very quickly we were able to establish that in that long private road, on the same evening,
someone had tried to steal a car. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The forensic analysis
of the brick suggests that whoever threw it has recently received a cut or a wound of some sort.
There was a sufficient amount of DNA on the brick, because it came from a wound.
So there was blood. And in DNA terms, that's a lot of DNA. So it would be very easy to take that DNA,
process it, and get a profile very quickly. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): For the DNA sample to work,
the suspect must be in the British National DNA Database. He or she will have committed a crime from which their DNA
is taken and registered. The DNA database existed in 2003, but it was relatively small at that time.
And those were people that were arrested for and convicted of crimes, and those profiles
were kept on the database. So we had a pool of data against which we could compare our profiles.
The blood is DNA typed and compared to the National DNA Database. There was no match.
Then we were in difficult territory of what do we do now? NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): With the DNA option exhausted
and other leads inconclusive, the investigation is rapidly reaching a dead end. Police now privately admit it's unlikely they'll
ever find Michael's killer. If you have a crime that's a one off, and you've never committed a crime before,
those are the most difficult people to find. And I honestly didn't think that they would catch anybody.
British detectives are using tried and true forensic techniques, but the results are
not what they're hoping for. They don't yet know that they're on the verge of developing
a new kind of forensic science technique, a technique that will be used around the world.
Welcome back to the "Bloodline Detectives", where we look around the world at the latest
scientific breakthroughs police use to solve cases that were once unsolvable. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): 2003, British investigators
are running out of ideas in the death of Michael Little. The 53-year-old truck driver's body
is discovered in the cab of his truck at the side of a highway outside London in March.
What police first thought was a tragic accident has become a murder investigation
when it's clear a brick thrown from a nearby bridge is the cause of Michael's death.
Investigators retrieve a DNA sample from the brick, but there is not a match in the British National DNA Database.
Police now fear they've reached a dead end. We're a few weeks down the line now,
and I was under some pressure as to justify why I was still investigating a crime that potentially you're not going
to find the person that did it. We have nothing to go on other than the fact, we know we're looking for a man.
We've got a brick. We've got a bridge. And we think the brick came from a building site close
to the bridge. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Although DNA they obtained from the brick has failed to yield a result,
police still believe it's the key to cracking the case. They just need to find a match.
Well, pretty much every living organism contains DNA. It's what makes an organism what it is.
It makes a dog a dog and a person a person. Now, human beings have and share about 99% of the DNA in common.
And that 1% that is different makes us all individuals. So DNA is individual to the person, apart from the case
of identical twins and clones. So with that knowledge, you can use DNA, if you can recover it from a scene of crime,
to potentially identify a suspect. Because they had DNA from the brick, what they had to do
was identify an individual. So they carried out what they call a mass screen, which
was to go from door to door, asking people to contribute DNA to be compared against that crime scene.
So now that DNA would be kept separate and would be disposed of. It would not go on the database.
So it was just for the investigation of that crime. We can't swab every man in the area.
Let's draw up a criteria. And our best guesstimate is that probably at 1 o'clock in the morning, someone who's out wandering
about, potentially has been out for a night in Camberley, and is on their way home.
So we're going to find everybody that lives in that area, male, over the age of 16, under the age of 25,
and to start asking them for voluntary swabs. So we had a geographical plan, where
we were interested in houses within certain parts of one side of the motorway, the other side of the motorway.
And we gradually got larger in terms of our geographical area as we eliminated people.
But the problem, of course, is mass screening wasn't that common at that time. It is now, but it wasn't then.
So we were in relatively uncharted waters. Consequently when the police decided to ask local people in the Camberley area
to come and give their DNA to rule themselves out was quite an unusual request. And it certainly raised some people's hackles.
What are the rights of the police holding this information? What are they going to do with it?
Is it just going to be used? Will it be disposed of? Our strategy was always ethically we had to be
clear about what we were doing. Because when you start to do mass screenings and take DNA samples from people,
there is a whole host of ethical issues that come to mind. You know, when you start asking people about where they come
from, are they related to this person, are they related to this person, sometimes it throws up
some pretty odd results. So you have to be prepared for that. So we were swabbing in what's called batches.
So every time we took 100 swabs, we would send them to the lab in batches. And every time, the results would come back as negative.
So the more swabs we sent, the more we would go in through our geographical areas,
eliminating people. As we started to eliminate people in batches, it became-- the enormity of the task became clear.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): While the mass screening rules out thousands of people, there is still no match
for the DNA on the brick. Well, these people were ruled out, but the person they wanted to come forward
hadn't come forward. Inevitably, he was never going to step forward. People are known to live in houses not necessarily
there at the time you swab. Some people who own houses don't live in them. So you have a whole host of problems
with doing house-to-house investigations. It's difficult. It must be an appalling experience for the family
of a victim, waiting for something to turn up that will-- it won't solve their grief, but it will certainly
fill a sense of justice. I think we were a little bit despondent, but we knew that they were doing everything they could.
And they were keeping-- the main thing was, the police were keeping us informed every,
every single time something came up. Surrey Police did-- they were doing everything they could.
And you always had that encouragement that they were going to have a breakthrough.
But then you just think again, well, how on earth are they going to have a break-through?
There's no CCTV on the bridge. What chance have we got? We knew it was a challenge.
You know, and quite rightly, people were saying, well, look, you've got lots of other investigations
with lots of better investigative leads. Why aren't you pursuing those? They are at a dead end, which happens in these cases.
So for six months, this inquiry languished, technically, without essentially kickstart that it
needed to find the culprit. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Then lead investigator Graham Hill comes across another possibility, which
cracks the case wide open. What do we do now? We've got to think a little bit out of the box.
We've got to be quite clever in what we do. And then I remembered that I'd been to a seminar in London
a few months before, where they were talking about this new technique of using what's known as familial DNA.
And that it was possible to trace someone through a relative that may be on the database.
It was totally revolutionary. What we were looking to do is to take DNA for which there was
no match on the database, and search to see if we could potentially identify relatives, which could then be investigated
further by the police. It was completely new to me, completely new. And it was only when Graham explained it to me,
and I thought, that's brilliant. You inherit 10 what's known as alleles from your mom and 10
alleles from your father. And that you have a DNA profile that's made up of 20 alleles.
And that if you search for someone who's got 16 or more of those alleles, if you find someone that's got 16 or more,
they are more likely than not to be a relative of the person you're looking for.
Therefore if you have a database of people, say three, four million people, and the DNA profile,
and you ask the question, are there any relatives in this database, what you're actually doing is sorting
the whole database from the most likely to the least likely to be related. And that's what we did in familial searching.
It won't tell you who did the crime, but it will definitely put you in the right area of the person
that did the crime. And that's what we were looking for. So our question to the database was, tell me everyone that's
on the DNA database now in 2003 that has more than 16 of these alleles, and that may be a relative of the person
we're looking for. So six months after the crime, Surrey Police contacted us and said, could we help with this investigation?
The DNA from the scene, no hit on the database. Door-to-door mass screening had failed.
Could we do anything? They assured me that the technique of familial DNA was possible.
British detectives are getting closer to tracking down Michael's killer, and a new forensic technique called
familial DNA is crystallizing. That's next on the "Bloodline Detectives". NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): By mid-2003, British detectives
decide to try the revolutionary new method of DNA familial searching to solve the death of Michael Little.
The 53-year-old truck driver killed while driving on a motorway by a brick thrown over a bridge.
We were not going to identify a particular suspect. What we were going to do was to trawl through the database
and try to give them some intelligence leads, which they could then take into their investigation
and work through in the normal policing manner. The DNA profile from the brick was sent to the database,
and that was compared against the entire database, looking for close matches. And we produced a list of individuals that
were manageable to the force, a list of 20, starting at 16 out of 20, and working our way down.
And the theory was that they would work their way through those names. And if they didn't come up with anything,
we could give them another list, and another list, until we were fairly confident that we were
away from distant relatives. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The match produces a number of possibilities.
They were spread right across the United Kingdom. And we said, OK, so who's the closest to the crime scene?
And it turned out there was a family called Harman that lived very close to that crime scene.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): This is the crucial lead the team has been waiting for.
So they went, knocked on the doors, talked to these individuals, who of course were innocent,
because they didn't match the crime scene profile, and asked the question, depending on the level of DNA
match, do you have a brother? Do you have a son? Do you have a father, et cetera.
And where were they at this particular time? Can we talk to them? And would they mind providing a sample
for elimination purposes? We were able to establish that the Harman family had a son,
that he lived close by, and that potentially he might be the person we were looking for.
And we decided very quickly to send out some officers to take a sample from him.
And that's what we did. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): British police arrive at the door of Craig Harman.
We immediately said that we had cause to ask him for a voluntary sample. There was some hesitation at first.
There was obviously a lot of stuff going through his mind. But he agreed to give the sample.
We took a mouth swab from him and then away we went. [DRAMATIC MUSIC] We were told that that was the profile we were looking for.
His profile matched the profile found on the brick. So we had some early indication that this guy, Craig Harman,
had been in contact with the brick. So our conclusion was, well, this man needs to be spoken to.
And the only way to do that for a murder investigation is to arrest him. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): The chances
are slim he's not their man, but investigators must establish just what happened on the bridge over the highway
the night Michael Little died. The job's only partly done. You know, we've identified someone as a potential suspect,
but that person may come along and say, yeah, I touched a brick. I'm a build-- I work on a building site.
I work on that building site. There could be a whole host of reasons why someone's DNA material can be found on the brick.
So the job's not done. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): On October 30, 2003, police arrest Craig Harman and bring him in for questioning.
When I first heard that the police had arrested somebody, it was this overwhelming feeling that we
need to get some revenge. Couldn't praise the police enough, really, for not giving up.
It's an interesting development, but I think we were all wise enough not to get too excited too early.
Because what you've got is someone who's touched a brick. You haven't got someone that intentionally
threw a brick to kill a driver. DNA is important, but it's not the whole story. You know, there's still traditional policing techniques
that need to be done. You know, once you've identified someone using DNA, you still have to put them in the area.
You still have to put a circumstantial case around it. And of course, you've always got the opportunity
then that once they're arrested, they might admit the crime. Which again, would be good evidence.
But it would be foolish to get too excited too early in the investigation. But it isn't long into the interrogation
before Craig Harman admits what happened. So why did he kill Michael Little? Did he know Little, or is it just a random act?
The bloodline detectives are about to find out. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): October 2003, police outside London,
England now believe they've found the killer of Michael Little, a 53-year-old truck driver
who dies after a brick is thrown through the window of his cab six months earlier.
Detectives use a revolutionary forensic technique, familial DNA, to track down and arrest Craig Harman.
When explaining to police-- eventually when admitting that he had committed this crime, he said it was
just a drunken stupid moment. That may well have been the case. And it's sort of the tragedy of it
is that if that was the case, then the results were catastrophic and indeed fatal.
Two youths were in town drinking, had consumed an amount of alcohol, and were going back home.
And that route home took them over the bridge. And for some reason, partway home,
they decided to try and steal a car, a Renault Clio. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Harman had
cut his hand on broken glass while breaking into a car. Picked up a brick from a nearby house
that was having an extension built, and took it up to the bridge and threw it off.
And it just so happens that Michael's lorry was driving by underneath at the time.
It came straight through the windscreen, top right of the windscreen, and struck him on the chest.
What emerged was that Michael Little had managed to avoid what could have been a greater catastrophe.
He put on the hazard lights, despite having been hit by a brick. He swerved to avoid any other vehicles,
and managed to pull over onto the hard shoulder, turn off the engine, whilst going
through what was obviously a very violent heart attack. Almost perfectly parked on a hard shoulder
so perfectly the ambulances and police cars had passed it so many times. It's just unimaginable what he must
have been going through in that cab at that moment. But he still managed to do that.
His ignition was turned off, but the hazards were left on. Now, who could do that when you literally
would have died instantly? But he did, and he obviously averted a major disaster
on that motorway. His foot was still on the foot brake when he was found. It was a very courageous and brave act that he did, to pull
that lorry off the motorway. For me, it sums Mike up. It just sums him up perfectly.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): As Michael Little sat dying in his truck, Craig Harman is on the bridge
above. He must have seen my brother's vehicle stop, but he walked away, walked across the bridge
and went home. If that lorry had, for example, jackknifed, then the next cars to come along, the lorries to come
along, could well have rammed into it and caused a big accident. Maybe he didn't realize how serious--
you know, serious damage he'd done. I'm sure if he'd have been thinking straight,
he probably wouldn't have done what he did. But unfortunately, facts are, he did.
He killed somebody. But you're not telling me he didn't see the media as to what
happened, especially locally, because there was so much media coverage going on within that area.
And they didn't come forward. And they knew they'd done wrong, but they didn't come forward.
We were just so desperately unlucky that we lost Mike, but so desperately lucky that they tried
to break into that vehicle. Because without them breaking into the vehicle, he wouldn't have cut his hand.
And when he picked that brick up, that blood from his hand went onto the brick. And without the blood on the brick,
we wouldn't have had any DNA. So you know, desperately, tragically, unlucky. But thank goodness we got something out of it.
He had taken Mike away from us, ruined our lives. So yeah, I was really, really thankful to the place, of them
not giving up. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): Craig Harman is charged with the manslaughter of Michael Little.
Harman's case comes to trial April 2004. To be honest, our prosecution case was very simple,
and some murder investigations are very complex. But this was relatively easy to put together, in terms of we
have a man who was in the right location. He puts himself in that location. He admits throwing the brick, and we
have some forensic evidence to support that he's been in contact with the brick.
He's been interviewed by the police under caution, and admitted the offense. So it was pretty clear cut, as far as we were concerned.
And it remained to be seen when he went to court, whether he pleaded guilty or we went to trial.
The case gripped the public imagination, this pointless, destructive behavior that ended with a man
dying shocked the British public. Why would somebody stand on a bridge and push a rock over it
to kill someone? Or to risk killing them? It seems utterly banal. It seemed pointless.
I mean, people were horrified by it. I remember being sat in the old Bailey in the public gallery, looking down at Craig Harman,
and just-- I think I just stared at him all the way through. And I pretty much got no emotion,
no emotion, no remorse, regret, just very stony faced. Craig Harman was charged with murder
but later pleaded guilty to manslaughter, and was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 6 years in prison.
Murder is where somebody has committed to kill someone in a premeditated way, planned it.
Manslaughter is where generally they killed someone through accident. Now, in this case, it's interesting.
Because it's thought that the brick was picked up from a building site or a house or wherever.
And it was thought that that was used in a premeditated way. That may well be the thoughts of the family,
but the jury found that was manslaughter. In other words, he didn't necessarily mean to kill.
NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): To Michael's family, Harman's sentence seems too lenient.
The defense had asked to take it down to manslaughter. And the police had a good old chat with Sue and I, and said,
if we don't accept manslaughter, he could get away with nothing. And we couldn't allow that to happen.
So we had to go with the manslaughter. The family were obviously very disappointed
that Michael's life seemed to only be worth 6 years, but in legal terms, that was what it was.
And the fact that he'd already spent a year in custody meant that he only did the 2 years.
You know, 2 years for a whole life? It's just wrong, very wrong. I can never forgive that person for taking Mike away.
It took him away from me, from Sarah, and from all his family, and his friends. Because he was loved by everyone.
And he's now out living his life. I take comfort from the fact that every day this guy thinks
about what he did, and he's got to live with that for the rest of his life. Yeah, we've got to live with the fact
that we've lost Mike for the rest of our lives, but he's got to live with what he did.
My brother was such a huge, huge personality, that the void he's left will never, ever be replaced.
Never. 16 and a half years on, it's still raw. You think, yeah, yeah, time heals,
but you just never get over it. Just never get over it. There's always something that brings it back
to the forefront of your mind. NANCY GRACE (VOICEOVER): While the death of Michael Little
is devastating for his family and friends, the case demonstrates the incredible capabilities
and potential of familial DNA. I was pleased that the science worked. I was pleased that justice had been served,
but somebody was dead. And a family was in mourning, and somebody was going to lose their liberty.
It's always mixed emotions in those cases. This technique was used and was spectacularly successful.
And I still maintain today that without familial DNA, this case would never have been detected.
We would never have identified the person that threw that brick. We would never have known how or why Michael Little died.
To this day, Michael Little's family wonders whether Craig Harman got the sentence he deserved.
Harman, drunk at the time, made a stupid split second decision that took a precious family
member away forever. While he's out of jail now, he will live with his crime for the rest of his life.
In the end, if it wasn't for the bloodline detectives and their use of familial DNA, the Littles
may have never known the identity of the man responsible for Michael's death. [THEME MUSIC]

Brief Summary

The episode reveals how familial DNA solved Michael Little's murder after a brick killed him in 2003.

Key points

The Shocking Incident. A brick thrown from a bridge kills truck driver Michael Little, leading to a murder investigation.
Groundbreaking Forensic Science. Investigators turn to familial DNA analysis to solve the case, a revolutionary technique at the time.
A Family's Heartbreak. Michael Little's family grapples with the shock of his murder and the search for justice.
The Dead End. After exhausting leads, police fear they may never find Michael's killer.
A Breakthrough Idea. Lead investigator Graham Hill recalls a seminar on familial DNA, sparking a new direction in the case.
Familial DNA Revolutionizes Investigations. British detectives use familial DNA to track down Michael Little's killer, Craig Harman.

Episode highlights

Episode quotes

We were an ordinary family plunged into a murder inquiry.

A family member describes their unexpected situation.

2:51WatchApr 1, 2021

Tension

75/ 100High tension

More from True Crime Files

Solve the Crime

Read a real case one clue at a time, then see how your call held up against the investigators.