What Secrets Lie Buried in the Sibillini Mountains’ Unsolved Case? | Forensic Files

The story I have for you today is wild. It has art world, heist drama. It has mysterious telegrams, a snowstorm,
ransom plots. This is the story of Janette Bishop May and Gabriella Guerin. On the morning of Sunday, November 30th,
1980, snow is falling in Sarnano, Italy. It's this medieval hilltop village turned ski resort tucked into the base
of a mountain range. The kind of place that looks like something out of a fairy tale almost. I think uh my daughter
would call it Arendelle essentially. But this isn't a picturesque blanket of snow
that we're talking about. Right now there is a fullon snowstorm. One that is worrying a local surveyor. This guy
named Nazareno Vinanzi. And he's worried because just the day before, so that would been Saturday, November 29th, two
women walked into his office to hire him for a project. And in conversation and over snacks as they like went about
their stuff and talked about what they were doing, it came up that they were planning to take a drive up into the
mountains later that afternoon, which he was like absolutely not a good idea because of the impending snowstorm. But
he was afraid that maybe they hadn't listened because after they left he expected to hear from them again. But it
was now 24 hours later, full storm here now and he hasn't heard from them. And are these two like locals who would
be used to the weather, know what to expect. So one is and one isn't. 40-year-old
Janette Bishop May, she lives in London normally, but she just bought a country house nearby. She was trying to line up
contractors and stuff for a renovation. That's actually why they were meeting with the surveyor,
but her friend with her, 39-year-old Gabriella Guarine, she lives in Italy, like not this part exactly, but she is
there with Janette to translate for her. So, when the surveyor guy starts getting
nervous, he starts making calls first to the boarding house where he knew that the women had been staying, and they
confirm his fears. The owner says that the women never came back the night before. So, then he tries the man who
sold Janette her house. Maybe, just maybe, she decided to spend the night at her new place, but he says no. And he
adds that Janette actually asked to meet him yesterday, but then she never showed
up. So now Nazareno's really worried. And so he goes straight to police and reports Janette and Gabriella missing.
And at first, police are probably thinking the same as most people probably would, right? Two women
unfamiliar with the area. They drive into a mountain snowstorm and they get stuck. Maybe they lost their way. Maybe
they pulled over to wait it out. Now, when they're reported missing, like the storm is still raging, so they can't do
anything in that instant. But as soon as it calms down a little bit, police launch a full search effort. We're
talking helicopter, dog, ski patrol, volunteers, like they're all scouring the mountain for these women, or even
their car, which is this small dark colored hatchback with license plates from a city called Sienna. And Sienna is
about 3 hours away. So, a car with those plates would kind of stand out here, right? It's not like they're unheard of,
but like easier to look for, for sure. And at the same time, investigators start piecing together the women's last
known movements. And some of it tracks, right? Like witnesses report seeing their car
heading down toward the mountain at around 100 p.m., which was like right after Nazareno said that they left, but
then either they changed their minds or they went up the mountain and came back.
And like it was just like a quick trip because somebody sees them again at 4:15 in town. and it's this employee of a
construction store and he knows it was them at 4:15 because he actually saw them earlier with that surveyor. They
had like come in to pay an invoice. But the interesting thing is that he says at
4:15, Janette is wearing different clothing than she was before. So, I don't know
that that means they did or didn't go up the mountain. Like I said, it would have
been a short trip. But if she changed, she at some point in time had to go back to like where they
were staying to change her clothes. Correct. The thing is though, we don't have any sightings of them between 1 and
4:15, especially like we don't have anyone at the boarding house who saw them in that time. There are however
people who saw them after that. Witnesses remember seeing them heading to their rooms and they remember seeing
their car parked out front of the boarding house at around 5:00 p.m. And this is notable because this is about
when the street lights come on. And around this same time, they see the women actually like driving away from
the boarding house. So like we know they're there after 4. We know at 5 they're driving away, but we don't know
where they go at 5:00. There aren't any other sightings of them or their car for
the next 2 plus hours until around 7:20 p.m. when their car is seen heading downhill from the town center with two
people inside. Why would they wait until 7:20 to leave then and go to the mountain presumably? Like this is
happening in a snowstorm, right? And it makes you think that they didn't go before cuz if you did, then
why would you go back in a snowstorm, right? And listen, I don't know for sure if they were going to the mountain at
that time, right? Like you said, they could have gone up and come back already, right? Like the way it works is you have
to like go down the hill to like the base and then go up into it. So just cuz they were going down doesn't mean they
were. But it's kind of like the assumption everyone is making. And to your point, it makes no sense to do that
when the storm is like beginning. Like, you know, you're going to be putting yourself in a bad spot. Like, you're
already warned at 12:45 when you leave, don't do it. Why would you do it at 7:20?
So, police don't know where they were going, if it was even them. But in all this time that they're searching, there
is still no sign of Janette, Gabriella, or their car. And by this time, it's Sunday afternoon, and the storm is
picking back up. So, the mountain search is temporarily called off. Now, it's around this time that Janette's husband,
Steven, arrives in town. Now, he's been notified about her disappearance. He's ready to help any way he can. Starting
with more background on his wife, who turns out is the ex-wife of Evelyn D. Rothschild, one of the richest men in
the world at the time. Janette and Evelyn met when Janette was a model, and they were married for 5 years. That's
actually how Janette and Gabriella met. Gabriella worked as a cook for the Rothschilds in the UK. And even after
Janette and Evelyn divorced in 1971, Janette and Gabriella stayed close. So close even that Janette is the godmother
of Gabriella's daughter. And then Janette met Steven a few years after her divorce and then they got married in
1977. Now Janette's mom said in an interview with the Evening Standard that her and Evelyn's relationship post
divorce was amicable. So, if she had enemies, they probably weren't in her past marriage, right? But her being the
ex-wife of a Roth's child is enough to draw attention and set off a media frenzy because abductions for ransom are
happening all over Italy at this point. I mean, well, like a lot of people know about
John Paul Getty, but I had no idea that between the 1960s and the 1990s, over 700 people were abducted by organized
crime syndicates. Yeah. In Italy. and they were held for ransom. So if someone thought a member of the Rothschild
family was alone in a small town village, like that is a potential gold mine for the wrong person. I mean, and
you're not even going to believe this. So just a year before this, a British businessman named Roth Child was
abducted in Italy by criminals who thought that his name was Roth'schild. I mean, you truly can't even make that up.
I know. But that all that to say, would they even know that she like at one point in
time was a Rothschild? She hasn't been married to one in years. And you can't like Google her right now.
Yeah. Not just like her walking down the street or something, but her passport still says Janette De Rothschild with it
just has like this note that she now uses the last name May. So the thinking is I I believe that if someone would
have seen documentation, right? She checks in somewhere, somehow they see her passport, like that's a dead
giveaway. Okay. Well, if this is a ransom abduction, there has to be a ransom demand. Like, has that happened?
No, that's the thing. It hasn't. And from the jump, Steven's not even buying this theory. He says that he and Janette
lived comfortably, but they weren't as wealthy as people might think. I mean, he works in HR at a department store.
And according to Town and Country magazine, Janette's divorce settlement from Evelyn had been modest. Like, she
got a home in London and then a small investment fund. And since then, she's like built a career as an interior
designer, like an antiques dealer. Okay. But all of that is kind of internal knowledge, right? Like, it's
totally possible for someone to see her passport, realize who she is or who she was married to, and think that she's a
lot wealthier than she actually is, right? Again, like Steven's saying, it doesn't make sense for them. I think the
whole point is like if someone thought she was connected to someone else still, right? It still could be like something
that someone thought and acted on. Well, and it's especially believable when a new witness comes forward. He
says that he saw two cars at around 400 p.m. on Sunday. So, this is the day after they go missing and he sees them
in a town about 10 minutes outside of Sarnano. He said the first car was a bigger car with Sienna plates and there
were two people inside. One of them looked like a woman. The other person, he couldn't tell. And then the second
car was a small dark hatchback also with Sienna plates. And like that matches up
with what Janette's car was. And that car also had two people inside. And one of them looked like Janette. So, we
talked about this a little bit, but are Santa plates really that out of the ordinary? Like in this region? I'm
thinking about like seeing a Michigan plate or Illinois plate or an Ohio plate here in Indiana. It's not a ton, but
it's not unheard of. Yeah. And it is a ski resort, so like one or two cars with Sienna plates, like
it's probably not a big deal. But I think it's just the fact that they're seeing them like together.
They're seeing the hatchback. Like it's all it's all the things. And there are a
few people in Sarnano that start recalling this same thing that in the days before and after the women
disappeared, there were a lot of cars with Sienna plates. So it must have been like more than usual, enough that it
raises eyebrows. Now, police can't link any of those specifically like to any of
this, but it kind of gets them thinking. So, what if Janette and Gabriella were in two separate cars? Like, not that
they brought two cars, but like that that sighting was real. Like, did someone follow them? Did someone come?
Like, who did they get separated somehow? Yeah. basically. And if that sighting is
legit and you combine it with everything else that stood out to an investigator we spoke to, like them missing the
meeting with the homeowner and possibly going to the mountains more than once, then maybe this wasn't just a wrong turn
in a snowstorm. Maybe now they're thinking they were taken against their will. Did they ever fully search the boarding
house where the women were staying? Like was anything missing? So, from what I like I saw, it like doesn't look from
like what police can tell that anything had been disturbed. I don't know how much they actually tore it apart though
and like did a detail search. I get the sense it wasn't very much because something interesting is found there
that like doesn't come to their attention until December 4th when Steven finds it. And what he finds in their
room was this handwritten note seemingly written by Janette. And it lists a few phone numbers and it has a line that
just says, "Please do not hesitate." Hesitate to do what? Ex. Yeah. So, I I've gone in circles with so
many things on this. This is one of them. One of our writers I was talking to thought that maybe it was like a note
for the front desk like, "Hey, if these people call, like don't hesitate to like approved numbers."
Yeah. But A, why wouldn't it be with the front desk is my question. B, even if it
was going to be given to the front desk, like it just hadn't yet, wouldn't you put someone's name and not the number?
Like if this person calls, what if it's like the opposite? Like maybe don't hesitate to reach out to
these people for in case of emergency. I don't know. Exactly. Like reach out to them for like
it doesn't give enough information like and it doesn't add up. Doesn't even make
more sense after they find out who those numbers belong to. I guess one was to a
beach club 2 hours south of Rome and the others went to like three different men
who they were able to or they were at least able to find two of them that I know of. And it doesn't seem like any of
them have anything to do with any of this. And it doesn't seem like any of the numbers or people connected to the
numbers get tied to an incoming telegram that gets delivered to the boarding house from Rome shortly after. So, this
telegram is addressed to someone named Janine May. And this is where things get so weird cuz right off the bat, like the
telegram itself is strange. Like, it feels like it's for Janette May, but as far as police know, nobody calls her
Janine. So, like, where did that come from? Yeah, that's off already. All this thing says is I am waiting for
you. And then it's followed by a Rome address and it's signed by someone named Roland.
And is this address a house, a a business? Does it exist at all? Yeah, I know. So, this is where things
get super weird. Not only does the address exist, they don't even have to look up the address to know that it
exists. They know it because the address is already on their radar in connection to
another crime. I am popping on to start a conversation about a case. I cannot get it out of my
head. A true mind bender. A huge twister your way. You gut check all your assumptions. Cuz this is a case that
starts like so many before. Hi fraud junkies. On December 3rd, so a couple of days
after the women disappeared, but before that Janine May telegram was received, another mysterious telegram was the
center of an investigation unfolding in Rome. This one was sent to a director of
the famous auction house Christy's at its Rome headquarters and it said something like recovery is possible and
then it directs them to the address that was on the Janine May telegram. But this
one was signed by someone named Rodrigo. Okay. But recovery of what is possible?
Probably art. At least that's what police think. Because because of Christy's. Yeah. And because the night after
Janette and Gabriella went missing, there was a major art theft at Christy's in Rome. Like things are feeling like a
little backwards, but art probably. Wait, so these two women were somehow tied up in an art theft operation? Is
that what you're saying? I don't know if they're tied up in it necessarily, but it sure like seems like the two events
have to be connected in some way, right? Like, right, we have this address, same one being used. I mean, that alone
is enough to sell me on it, but on top of that, it turns out that Janette does have some connections to the art world
through her interior design work. So, it's not like it was like completely foreign, right? Like, it's not like if
all of a sudden people are like asking for ransom and tying me to the art world, like no go.
But then things get more complicated because while police are trying to wrap their heads around a connection between
these two telegrams, they learn that three more have been sent to families of prominent people who have been abducted
in Rome. And again, they instruct them to go to that same address in all of them. And they were addressed to the
family members telling them again specifically to go to this address or was it like Janette's where it was like
addressed to her to go. So I know one of them was addressed to the family members. I don't know about the other
two. So I know one is different than Janette. I don't know about the other ones.
And it's weird because like they when I say ransom, they weren't even making straight up ransom demands. They were
actually like more similar to the Christy's telegram saying like go to this place if you want answers kind of
thing. And I don't know if those families went to the address or what happened if they did. I just know that
one of the people who had been abducted, this industrialist is eventually found dead. He had been shot in the head even
after part of the $450,000 ransom had been paid. The other two people, however, did eventually get
released. But police are probably feeling like time is running out to track down whoever sent these telegrams.
Like how dangerous are these people? Now they're able to figure out the addresses
that the telegrams were supposedly sent from. And there are like a couple different from addresses. But surprise
surprise, when they look it up, they're able to figure out that the addresses that the telegrams were supposedly sent
from cuz they're like they're from address. There were a couple different ones. They were different like numbers
but all on the same street. Mhm. They don't exist or like the numbers don't. The street itself though does
exist and so police obviously like search it except they don't find anything or like find anyone who knows
about like the person who would have sent this except when they're doing this like canvasing. They do find
interestingly that another director who works for Christy's art house or auction
house actually lives on that street. Oh yeah. which is, you know, a huge red flag. And police search his apartment
where they find illegal firearms. They find narcotics. They also search his girlfriend's place.
And according to Corier Deisera, there they find a diagram of Christy's alarm system. So, it's looking more and more
likely that this director may have sent the telegram to the other director, as well as maybe even planned that heist.
But even like with all the weird things they collect, apparently there is nothing concrete to prove that this guy
was involved. And none of the art that was taken is ever recovered. So they can't tie this director to any of the
telegrams or the ransom plots either. And even though police do arrest him, he is eventually released.
And all the while, police are still wondering if he has any connection to Gabriella and Janette's disappearance. I
feel like the key to all of this is this address that everyone was told to go to,
like that was involved in all the telegrams, which I told you is real. Yes. Okay. So,
when they go to this address, it does not disappoint. According to the Manchester Evening
News, they find at this address a group of South Americans living there, one of whom is a woman out on bail who had been
charged in 1976 with abducting an ambassador to Rome. Oh, I know. Like kind of the thing we're
looking into. Yeah. So, she and everyone else in the apartment end up getting arrested when
they find like narcotics in the place, right? They can't time to the abductions. Yes. But they like
any connection to the Christy's director with narcotics at the other address. No. So, like
different. Okay. Well, I don't know that it's different, but I just know they didn't find any
connection to him like except for the telegrams. Like, but on paper, no. No connection except for all the
connections. Got it. So, but when police start digging into the people who live there, they uncover this whole other
layer. So, they learn that two people in the apartment had some kind of beef with
another woman and that she might have sent the telegrams to set them up. Like, she knew police would investigate and
that they would get raided. Okay, but you got to be real lucky if you just like guess addresses that tie
back to the street where all the guys lived and that guy also turns out to be shady. Like that's a lot. I agree. I I
will say sometimes things can be stranger than fiction because when they start like going down this road and
looking into this woman, what they see is that the Peruvian embassy was on the same street as that like Shady
Christiey's director and this woman that they suspect was the sender was from Peru. So they're like, I mean, it's a
street she would have been familiar with or she's connected to the guy, too. Two
birds, one stone. Police don't think so. They think that she probably saw these big cases in the
news and took advantage of that because she had some kind of axe to grind. And police just write it off like just
like that. I know. So, just to recap what they're writing off, finding a known kidnapper at the address
that the telegrams referenced. Mhm. Finding a director of the auction house where the heist like where the heist
happened on the same street as the other address referenced. Mhm. I I All coincidence.
I'm having trouble like processing that many coincidences. I know. But police now are of the
mindset that the telegrams were just some kind of hoax. And so they put that line of investigation to the side. And
maybe because at that point they have a bigger better lead. Almost 3 weeks after
Janette and Gabriella went missing, we are now December 18th, the women's car is found. It's spotted by police on a
snowy roadside about 20 to 30 minutes from the boarding house. And truthfully, I don't even think they know it's a car
at first. Like, it's almost completely buried under a pile of snow. There's just like this part of it that was
reflecting the sun, which is what caught police's eye when they were up in a helicopter. But when search teams dig it
out, they know for sure it is Janette and Gabriella's car. Doors are locked, but they can still see the keys inside
along with some valuables. The car is in neutral with the handbrake pulled, and when they later examine it, the car is
totally fine and working. And importantly, when they got to it, they noticed that the wheels are on top of
asphalt, not a like huge layer of snow, which means that whoever drove it was driving on a at least clearish road.
They stopped intentionally on that road and left it there before the storm came down.
And is this like up the mountain or like down in the valley like on the way? Okay.
Yeah. So, it's up a mountain road about 4 miles or like 12 minutes from the closest town and not too far from where
they were staying. So, okay, the cars parked on again clearish road at least. If it wasn't
snowing so bad, why would they stop? I don't know. And I mean, I should clarify like just because like they're
not on top of a ton of snow doesn't mean that it wasn't getting bad. But you I mean you know we were in Indiana like it
takes a minute for the ground to actually freeze up hard enough to hold snow especially on a road that's being
driven. So really like what police are thinking is that they pulled over because it was getting really bad. And
in my mind it had been really bad for them not be able to go 12 minutes back to like the nearest town. You know what
I mean? But they talked to some workers who say that they got stuck in a snowbank on the same day that the same
women went missing near where Gabriella and Janette's car was found. Police think that like they saw it getting bad.
They like stopped. They pulled over to kind of like wait it out cuz you are on a mountain. Maybe you don't want to like
drive down in white out conditions. Fair. Sure. But then why leave their fully functioning car to venture out into the
snow? You and I are super familiar with snow. You don't just like get out of a car to wander to go someplace to like
maybe find something. TBD. I know. So yes, like I understand the sitting and waiting kind of if they
decide to go when it's a snowstorm. They're 12 months waiting. You don't feel safe. Sure. Pull off the
road. They think they got out because not too far off the road, it's like a short walk
from where the car is parked, police end up finding this house. So, they learned
that the owner of the house used it as a place for shepherds to stay during the summer, which is like a line straight
out of the Bible. But in the winter, it's typically empty. And the house owner even confirms that it should have
been empty that November/ December because repairs were being done on it. Except when police go to this house,
they search the house, there were signs that someone had been there recently, like the fireplace is full of ashes and
there's burnt furniture and there are used plates and silverware. Was there any like fingerprints or DNA?
So there's actually a note about them finding unknown fingerprints in the car that they sent off to agencies across
Italy as like I mean they sent Interpool Scotland Yard all of that and they never
say if anything comes of that though I know Jenna actually borrowed the car from a guy could be his blah blah blah
all that to say they never say anything about Prince in the house which I think is kind of weird because I know they
searched it pretty well like enough that they did find hair in the bathroom that
they think might belong to Janette or to Gabriella but in 1980. It's not like they can say
for sure it's theirs at DNA. They're just doing like a visual comparison. Yeah, maybe under a microscope or
something. So, they think that the women had been there. Like again, they pull over. They go to
this house. They even think that maybe they tried to signal for help by lighting fire on the balcony because
they found like burnt wood out there, too. How would all the searchers miss that?
Well, from what I can tell, this house is in a remote spot and I think it got buried in snow during the storm. Like I
don't even know how long a fire outside would have lasted or Okay. But there's fire inside too. You
said there's like ashes there like smoke from the fireplace inside. Yeah. But if you remember like they
don't start the search right away and even when they do they have to call it off for a little bit because the storm
like picks up again. And so like maybe I don't know I'm just guessing but like maybe like when there is a fire going on
there's no helicopters to see the smoke. No one out there to see the smoke. And then by the time that second storm
passes through, like everything's buried in snow and you're not setting fires on
anything. So because they're not there, then police wonder like, okay, did you see
that like all your options for like sending for help are gone? Did they possibly try to venture out on their own
like to one of those nearby towns, right? Car is buried. Can't use that. So they go to this like other local town,
which is another ski resort, to try and piece together what other locals might have seen. But that honestly ends up
muddying the waters even more because no one reports seeing Janette and Gabriella
after the storm. Instead, there are even more reported sightings from the day they disappeared.
Two hunters tell police that around 300 p.m. that day, they saw three people, two that they think were women, standing
near a dark-colored car close to where their car ends up being found. And then the manager of a hotel in town claims
that he saw Janette and Gabriella three times that same day between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. when they came into his
hotel for a drink. And when they left, the manager noticed Janette speaking to a man outside in a car. Now, I don't
have a full description of this guy, but General Carlo Biche Corsetti, that is a
mouthful, but he was an original investigator on the case, told us that the manager described this guy as
well-dressed in a way that stood out to him. So, we've got that. And then around
8:00 p.m., the manager was driving down the mountain to Sarnano when he passed three cars. One of them a dark color car
like Janette's. Now, this doesn't totally add up. because police double check with
Nazareno and the owner of the boarding house and they both say that the women didn't leave the boarding house until
around 9:45 a.m. which automatically doesn't make that that manager's timeline work if he's saying he starts
seeing them at like 10:00 and because of that inconsistency police decide to toss
his whole statement which sends them back to square one but I think that that sighting of her at
3:00 is interesting because is that where they went in between Right. Because we don't have them in Srano
between 1 and 4, right? So, is is that possible? Is that where they went? Maybe not up the
mountain. Doesn't explain why you're still going up there at 7:20. But it could be why no one saw them in
that town. They're at this other ski resort. I don't know. But that sighting up her at 2 p.m. I
think is really interesting because we don't like Right. We have that window. It's in the middle of that like, right?
So, is this where they went in that time? Did they not go up the mountain? They went to this ski resort at that
time. For what? I don't know. Now, at this point, Janette's husband, Steven, had to go back to London. So, police
traveled there to talk to him. In the time since he's been back, he's been looking into Janette's finances. And he
tells police that she had a few bank accounts, some in England, some in Italy, but there hasn't been any
activity in any of them since the day she disappeared. And none of the travelers checks that were issued to her
in November had been cashed either. But in this meeting, he also mentions that Janette did some business with a
gallerist living in London who happens to share a last name with a Sicilian crime family. And this starts to make
police rethink those telegrams. Even if they still can't make a clear connection to the Christy heist, this is
like, I don't know, another red flag. They know mafia bosses apparently used stolen art to launder money. So, did
Janette somehow get mixed up with the wrong crowd? Which, don't get me wrong, I would love
to go back to these telegrams. I think they're very interesting and I have so many questions, but when it comes to
Janette, everything else seems to be pointing to an accident. It's almost like police are going around and around
like in circles, right? like back and forth between theories because even an accident like there isn't one single
theory that totally fits accident. Why stop the car? Why take shelter? And then if you're going to take shelter, why
leave, right? And then what are those like possible sightings of them with other people,
other cars? Then why do they find stuff at that house? I mean, what if they were like held
there, though? I mean, that makes just as much sense as like anything else to me. But by who,
right? That's what they can't get a firm grip on. And listen, they keep getting tips about possible suspects and they
run them down, but then it ends up being nothing. Like, there was one woman who implicated her ex-boyfriend, said that
he was a Brazilian gem dealer who bragged to her about killing two women, but they end up arresting him on
something else. They show his picture around to people. None of those people can confirm that they ever saw him with
the women and they end up releasing him because according to a Scottish newspaper, the ex-girlfriend eventually
even admits that she made it all up to get back at him for their breakup. And amidst all these bogus allegations and
false leads they're chasing down, probably the most promising one gets totally missed
on January 30th, 1981. So, this is almost 2 months exactly after Janette and Gabriella disappeared.
Someone calls the Daily Mail's Rome office late at night claiming to have information about the women. The tipster
says that his name is Ian Ser and that Janette got a telegram the day she disappeared.
Another telegram. Well, no, no, no. This is this is the first telegram that she got. But he says
he he says that he knows about that telegram and he says another telegram has been sent to Christy's. The
important part of this is that none of this had been made public yet. Now because it had not been made public, the
editor didn't take this seriously. So like we know this is important, but the editor who took the call didn't
and was like, "Lol, what are you talking about? Bye-bye." Yeah, thank you, but no thank you. So
this kind of just stays in the back of this editor's mind. Doesn't even mention it to anyone. But as more and more time
starts passing, as police start getting hard up for leads and they eventually start telling the public more and more
about the case, he finds out about the telegram. Yes. And that's when he's like, "Oh,
shoot." So the editor first tries calling this Ian Ser fellow at the number that came through on his old
school TX. The number was for an Austrian hotel and magically Ian is still there.
He is there researching a book with two journalists. But get this. When the editor has a reporter reach out, this
Ian guy tells the reporter, "I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't call you. I don't know anything about
missing women in Italy or telegrams or Christiey's auction house." But whoever made that call had to have made it from
the hotel that Ian was staying at. It's not like they could just like say that because the way that it came through on
the TX like I was talking about, it's basically like a fancy typewriter that automatically records the number that
the message is coming from. Oh, so it's not like the guy even like left the number. It came out of the
machine. Yeah. Yeah. You can't fake it back then, right? So, when they're kind of just like like
stumped, right? Like they're like, "Okay, what? I don't know what this means." That's when the editor
eventually passes this on to police who go and question Ian and the two journalists that are with him trying to
establish some kind of connection between him or Christies or the women or freaking anything in this story.
And it turns out Ian grew a door to door parcel business into this huge logistics
company. Christy's was one of their clients, but they had like tens of thousands of clients.
So, like that doesn't seem like a a good enough connection. Yeah. His wife was a model like Janette
was at one point in her life, but he told police and us cuz girl like the team put in the work on this episode.
They were making international phone calls. He said that he had never met Janette or
Gabriella, who who by the way, like Janette met Gabriella like long after her modeling days. And while we couldn't
talk to the other two journalists that Ian was with because they've since died, their statements are in court documents
and both of them say that they had never heard Ian even mentioned Janette or Gabriella or this case until after that
call from the Daily Mail came in. Yeah, cuz he was like, "Dude, this is weird." So, they've got nothing here and
it like it kind of just goes away. They still will like follow up and question him for years afterwards,
like just seeing if this makes sense, like seeing if they miss something, seeing if stories change, but eventually
they like completely move on from this tip, which I kind of agree with. I feel like
we can cross him off the list, right? Ian didn't have anything to do with this. He doesn't like it seems super
bizarre that he's even involved, but I mean someone staying at his hotel knew about those telegrams called
or somebody like passing through. I mean, they don't have to be staying at the hotel, but they had to have like
been around. Yeah, even if they're just passing through, how do you know Ian's name to
live? I know. This is what I'm saying. It feels like such a spiderweb. Like it's
no wonder people get tangled up in this case cuz you want to just say like oh someone maybe knew Ian and knew he was
staying there and use his name. No, like we know it had to have come from the hotel. So someone had to like
know he was staying there and be there. So what is this person doing in Austria then 2 months after the women go
missing? And it's not even like this is like a bad hoax. This person had to have
actually known legit information that wasn't public, right? Because the telegrams weren't
public yet. Okay. So, did police look at other guests at the hotel? Did the hotel
like keep records of who did what calls? Were any of the employees looked at? Maybe.
General Ali Corsetti told us that he like straight up flew to Austria. Actually, he flew to many countries as
part of his investigation, but he actually couldn't say much more than that. So, I don't know what that
entailed. I have to imagine you look at like everyone who is in that hotel or whatever.
Especially if I'm thinking like employees who are at the hotel would have access to the phones would have
like who knows exactly who knows who's staying there. From the court I will I will say I don't
know what they did from the court records that we have the things I can actually see. It seems like police were
focused on Ian. I don't know how much they checked out other possibilities if at all. And I just know that Ian doesn't
go anywhere. So months pass, the snow melts, seasons come and go, winter comes again, and there is still no Janette or
no Gabriella. So on January 14th, 1982, Steven decides to make a broadcast, like
a public appeal for information. And B, I'm going to have you read the sections for me. One sec.
It has now been a year since the mysterious disappearance of my wife Janette and Gabriella Guin in the
mountains above Cernano in the Marqu region. Gabriella's two small children, 12-year-old Atavio and 4-year-old Joya,
lost their father almost 4 years ago in a car accident. Now, they have been without their mother for over a year,
and it is not fair to ask them to go on living in the uncertainty of what might have happened to her.
My wife's family and I too have endured the anguish and false hopes of a year marked by uncertainty. Despite repeated
searches and police investigations and despite the generous help of volunteers and local residents, this tragic
disappearance remains a mystery. What could have happened? Surely someone must be able to release us from the torment
and uncertainty of not knowing the truth. Was this disappearance the result of a terrible crime? or is there another
explanation? So, I'm really glad that he brought up Gabriella so much in this statement because it really does seem
like all the focus has been around Janette, especially when it comes to like all the foul play stuff. Did police
ever really dig into Gabriella's life? So, this is one of those other things where it's like if they did,
I don't know about it. Like, it's not in any of the official documents or the reporting that we looked at. I think
that police were much more heavily focused on Janette because like the world that she was in, right, the
Rothschild, the it was it felt much bigger, right? Like the world she moved in just
had more connections to what they think could be possible. Like I mean Gabriella
lives a relatively simple life in comparison. Like she provides for her kids the best she could after her
husband's death. She didn't have enemies. She wasn't moving in the same world. So, it seems like the consensus
was that she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. And we even tried to
reach out to her family to ask like some of these questions, but we couldn't get
in touch with anyone who knew her or her kids well. So, this statement goes out because if anyone is still holding on to
tips, police and Steven want to know. So, Steven offers up a reward of up to 100 million l which is like it would be
today like $235,000. and he's basically looking for any information that will help solve this
case. And he says there'll be even more if it leads to finding Janette and Gabriella alive. And this money, this is
everything Steven has to his name. And he is willing to give it all up to bring them home.
And maybe that's what it took. Because within 2 weeks on January 27th, he gets his wish, but not what he'd actually
hoped for. Hunters hiking up the mountain find objects scattered across the snow in a ravine in this like
densely wooded area about eight miles from where the cabin was. They're finding boots, purses, clothing, and
then bones. When police get there and do a formal search right away, they zero in on a
couple of things. First, they find a fork that looks just like the ones at the house that they believe Janette and
Gabriella sheltered in during the storm. The second thing was inside the purses,
which by the way, nothing is missing from. They noticed two watches that they believe belonged to the women. According
to a local Italian newspaper, Janette's watch is manually wound and Gabriella's is like a batterypowered watch.
Janette's stopped on December 12th, 1980 at 7:20 a.m. Gabriella's stopped a week
later, December 19th at 7:30 a.m. So, a week and 10 minutes apart exactly. Kind of spooky, I know.
And when was the car and the cabin found? Uh, so December 18th is when they found
those things. So, basically Janette's manually wound watch stopped 2 weeks after they went missing. Mhm.
Gabriella's battery one stopped 3 weeks after and just 1 day after the car was found.
So, I mean, if they would have waited just a little longer, they might have been found. Maybe if you want to stick
to the theory that they took shelter from the storm in the cabin and then they ventured out to get help, which is
clearly what this is meant to look like. But there are some real problems with that theory now that they have located
the women. First of all, if the bodies were there the whole time, why didn't anyone see
them? The investigator that we talked to said that that area that they were found
in, it was outside of police's official search radius. But a local veterinarian says that he had set a fox trap less
than 15 ft away from where they found the remains, but he never noticed a smell there. I mean, he even remembers
the exact spot when he goes back with police. And sure enough, there is still a bit of trap sitting tied to like a
nearby shrub. Also, like, okay, fine. The guy didn't notice him. What? They both just laid down and died in the
exact same spot. Like, I mean, animals had like gotten to the remains, right? Like, some of them had been scattered,
like bones, but like they're still pretty much intact in their clothes with their bags. Nothing seems to be missing.
Well, and I'm thinking also they were found in January and like not that January like time had passed. Like you
said, seasons had changed. Again, I think it's weird that they weren't found, but I'm just like I also like you
think about two women. Okay, we're going to venture out to get help. They just like what are the odds? I'm I'm saying
that they like even like succumb to the elements at the exact same spot together
and lay down. I'm like, what if like I can see one of them was like, okay, well, I'm going to keep going and I'm
going to get help because now the situation is even more dire, right? And like you need help. I need to
be able to bring people back to you. And like the even the watches, I mean, maybe it's because one was wound, one
was battery. Who knows? It's I just like I think about other cases we've done where people have where they think that
they die in the snow. They're they're not all found like in the same spot. If bodies are found together, it usually
means they died together. And that seems really unlikely when exposure is the cause of death.
Yes. And then more holes are poked in the exposure theory when police talked to a mountain rescue volunteer who
helped with the original search. He remembers that when the searchers went out, the snow was so deep that they
could only get through on skis. So again, the women are waiting until after the storm theoretically to venture out
to get help because they don't think anyone's coming. He doesn't think the women could have even physically made it
to where they were found in that ravine on foot. Especially because, by the way,
didn't mention this, Gabriella was wearing a skirt. So I don't think she would have made it 8 miles. And I go
back to like the fact that they're found together. Janette is not wearing a skirt. Like she was in pants or
something. So theoretically, in my mind, she could have gotten farther if they did at least try, but I don't think they
get the 8 miles to begin with. And there was even still some uncertainty over whose remains were found.
Like there's no DNA testing yet. So Janette ends up getting identified through dental records. There aren't any
on file for Gabriella. So it seems like police are mostly just relying on her clothes and stuff to identify her. And
eventually forensic testing confirms that the remains belong to a woman, but that's like it. I mean, police seem
pretty sure it's Gabriella. I mean, that's who went missing with Janette, and they have Janette, but they also
don't like look at any other possibilities based on the court documents that we read. But that ends up
being like a huge open question to her family. Well, yeah. And again, I have questions about all of this.
Honestly, especially these hunters that found them, like they just happened to stumble on these remains conveniently
right after a reward was announced. Oh, which they fully expect to cash in on, by the way. Just 2 days after
finding the bodies, one of those hunters writes a demand letter to Steven's lawyer for the reward money. Remember,
like all the money to Steven's name. And Steven's lawyer is like, "No, you legally have to tell police if you
find human remains. Like, that's a civic duty, not information." Yeah. And even though Steven's still willing
to pay them a portion of the reward, the hunter ends up suing him for the full amount and wins.
He He sues this grieving husband who put this money up to find his missing wife.
And he, like I said, he ends up winning. He gets the full reward plus interest. But it doesn't seem like police ever
look into any of the hunters as suspects. And maybe that's because at this point they're not looking at this
as a murder at all anymore. Especially when the medical examiner's report comes in on April 3rd. It shows there is no
physical evidence of trauma. So like no blunt force injuries, no stab wounds, bullets, and which again we're just
probably dealing with bones, but you can see that on the skeleton. And so going off of what he has, the medical examiner
thinks that the cause of death is probably just exposure. And based on what quote unquote he says, logic, he
believes that the women likely died sometime right after they went missing. But there's no way, he says, to tell how
long the remains had been in the ravine where they were found. So, the Emmy rules their deaths as accidental deaths
from exposure to snow. Steven gets permission to fly Janette's remains home to London, where they're cremated.
Gabriella is buried in her hometown, and a prosecutor moves to close the case. Close the case with so many open
questions yet. Mhm. I'm with you. Steven is with you. According to Town and Country magazine
in 1982, he reaches out to two journalists at the Sunday Times who have been reporting on the case. I mean, like
he can't let it go. So, he asked them to do their own investigation. And after months of work, the
journalists come up with a brand new theory that they publish in this 20page feature on November 7th, 1982. You
ready? Sure. So they think that Janette set up a meeting in the mountains to sell an
antique. But who she thought was a buyer was actually part of a Sardinian abduction ring and they abducted Janette
and Gabriella. And when the abductors thought that the women knew enough to identify them, they killed them. Right?
Like we know there's no ransom note, right? But the journalists alleged that if a note went to a family like the
Rothschild, the journalists say that they would keep that kind of thing quiet. Why?
Partially for safety. Like I mean they have money to hire people outside of law enforcement to advise them on things
like this, right? Like so why risk getting police involved if kidnappers are threatening
who they think is your family member? Who was your family member? They kind of keep it in the family.
Yeah. And plus, like I remember this from the Getty kidnapping. The Gettys didn't want to publicize or pay the
ransom at all because they thought that that would lead to more family members getting kidnapped.
I would think that like at least they would tell Steven, but again, maybe Steven would tell police because this
kind of seems wild to me to like protect your whole family and just like like leave her family wandering forever. But
this is the theory. And whether that theory is true or not, it gets enough attention that investigators actually do
take a deep dive into the evidence and reinterview witnesses. So like closed no more. This time around, they notice
another problem with the initial like theory or ruling or decision. And it comes to something so basic.
It turns out the women probably couldn't have seen the house from the road where
their car stopped. I had this question to begin with cuz like they pull off on the side of the road because it's so
bad. It's so bad and they don't want to stay in their running car. I've driven in really really bad snow
and visibility is like zero. It's so bad they don't want to drive 12 minutes back to the town,
right? But they can see like they get out of the car because why? In theory, they're going to seek shelter
in this house. But if it's so bad that they can't drive the 12 minutes back, how can they see the house?
They can't. So they're just getting out of their car into the white void of a snowstorm.
Yeah. So So when you put it that way, like yes, they would have left their perfectly fine running car to just walk
into the woods in a snowstorm, which is bananas. Bonkers. All that to say, when they're
found and their stuff is found, there is a fork from the house. So, and there are hairs in the house. They
make it seem like they were there, right? So, how did they get there if they went there?
Or who took them there? Because you would have had to know that this house was there to get from the car
to the house in a snowstorm. It makes me wonder like is the house not a shelter place but like a meeting
place. M. So it was like a pointed place that they were going to or someone took them to right like like
someone took them there like a rendevous point. Uh yeah, I don't know. I don't know. So
listen. Okay. So they're looking into this now cuz they they've realized they had this big flaw in their initial
theory. Yeah. And when they dig, like when you actually like go down this road, the
police end up learning that there may have been a connection between Janette and a very dangerous man who they
discover also has ties to the Christy's heist. Christy's back. Christy's back. So, as they're
interviewing and then reintering people for this new investigation, police speak
to one of Janette's friends who they show photos of people that they think she might have known. So they end up
showing her pictures of some guys that they think might be connected to Janette. And the friend recognizes one
of them, this guy named Sergio Vicari. He is an Italian antiques dealer and reported drug dealer who'd lived in
London until he was stabbed to death in his apartment on September 15th, 1982, which is after the women have like
disappeared, whatever. So, police in London were still investigating Sergio's murder when they searched his safe
deposit box and found photos of stolen antiques, some of which, by the way, were taken during Christy's heist in 80.
They shared that with the Italian police looking into the heist, which is how Sergio got on their radar. So, thank God
they had reopened this investigation cuz I almost wonder like if it had been closed and nobody was thinking about it,
like would this have ever been like brought up, tied back together? So, they keep going down this road. I
mean, this finally feels like it has some real weight to it and like maybe can explain the things we couldn't
before and it keeps getting more solid. Through a man who knew Sergio, they find
out that there was a name written in Sergio's diary, Janette. No last name though. And that guy remembers that next
to her name he saw a phone number. Problem is police can't track down Sergio's diary. So they can't track down
the number or tie it to Janette in any way. But even without the diary, the more police look into Sergio, the more
they think they may finally be on the right track because Sergio may have been involved in another mysterious death of
an Italian banker. So, I know I'm getting on a little bit of a tangent, like you got to understand who this guy
is. I'm like, the world that we're operating in. So, a British journalist tells police that a source, he can't say
who, but it's someone in the antique dealing world who has come up in the investigation before. This source told
him that Sergio had something to do with the death of a man named Roberto Calvie.
Roberto was the chairman of a Vaticanbacked bank that collapsed in June 1982 after an investigation showed
that the bank had committed massive financial fraud involving like secret offshore accounts, unauthorized loans,
and I mean they had ties to mafia groups. After all of that, this Roberto guy fled to London, and then he's found
hanging under a bridge 12 days later. His death gets ruled a suicide. Like, all done. Now, this journalist source
says that he knows Sergio is connected to Roberto's death because once when he was in Sergio's car, he had opened
Sergio's bag. This is the point where he's like alone in the car with the bag and he says a few photos fall out. One
of them was Roberto and then there was another photo of Janette. And the journalist tells police
that the source was still in the car with the pictures when Sergio came back. And Sergio actually told him that he was
involved in Roberto's death. What did he say about the picture of Janette? According to the source, nothing. Which
makes this a great lead that they can't do anything. Right. That's kind of a dead end.
Even though they are now more convinced that the women met with foul play, they still can't say when or how. Even the
why still feels fuzzy. Mhm. And they definitely can't say who. So without any suspects to charge,
even though like they feel like something different happened, the case still gets closed out in October of
1989. Okay. Do police ever retest the physical evidence from the house or the remains
or anything? Not that I can tell. I mean, certainly not before 89. and like there wasn't a
whole lot new knew they could do. I know that according to an Italian daily newspaper, so in uh 2005, a biology
professor actually reached out to Gabriella's family asking to analyze her remains. Like I think they were hoping
once and for all to confirm whether or not the remains belong to Gabrielle. Remember there's kind of like a question
about that. So her family lets this guy exume the remains. They also give him a DNA sample.
But this is so weird. when he runs the tests, it's only Gabriella's DNA that is present, no one else's, which like feels
like you're like, "Yeah, so what? No big deal." You would kind of expect something from Janette, right? Because
like back in the day, like this is happening in '8s, so they're kind of just like pushing everything
together, but not even pushing like even with how they were found, like animals like could
have moved stuff or whatever. back in the day like what they had wasn't advanced enough like the their type of
tech or whatever to like separate the remains when they were processed right you have like certain bones and and you
can probably guess based on height or whatever but I think everyone kind of expected
some mixing and like we said like Janette's remains end up being cremated and Steven refused to provide any
samples though like like I don't even know like what samples he would have so answers about like what what could
have been hers or not hers like that's long gone It's just like a weird thing. Again, I don't know that it means
anything. It's just like strange. And if you like look into this case, you're going to see it pop up. And for people
who want to get really conspiratorial, I think it it lends to that like, well, was Janette actually dead? Again, they
IDed her though through dental record. I don't know. I don't know. But it's like
things I've seen people spiral on. So, this testing gets done, but it doesn't bring police any new leads. And the case
again goes cold and interest waines until 2013. That's when a photographer named Marco Achetti makes some wild
claims which brings the Vatican back to this case and an old Crime Junkie episode. So we did a fan club episode
about the 1983 disappearance of Emanuela Orlandi. She was um the 15-year-old girl
who went to a Vatican City school. I'll link to it in the show notes if you guys
need a reminder. But Marco is the guy who claimed responsibility for her kidnapping. While he was already in
prison for running over a 12-year-old boy. So when police had questioned him about Emanuela, Marco says that in the
80s he was involved with this secret group that acted on behalf of religious figures who opposed mainstream Vatican
politics. They and he says like back to this case that they wanted to recruit Janette for some kind of blackmail plan
like they wanted her to falsely accuse the president of the Vatican bank and this is the bank that Roberto Calvie
chaired. they wanted her to accuse him of sexual assault, which so he throws that out there and then he makes a 180
degree turn and says that they never actually got in contact with Janette and that her death doesn't have anything to
do with him. So, so why bring her up at all? But okay, is there any connection between Janette and Emanuela or does
this guy just confess to everything for fun? Like, if I remember correctly, like
he they never actually found a connection. No, I don't think there's any connection
besides like him, right? Like he's just like bringing it up in both his versions. Like Janette and
Emanuela were like tangential pieces in his group's Vatican blackmail plot. And like when I tried to like see if there's
any like ties, like the only thing I could find was that Steven hired the same lawyer as Emanuela's family, but
that's about it. And Emanuela's family has been clear that they think Marco made up the allegations involving their
daughter for attention. So if that's true, it's very possible he's doing it again.
But I mean, it's a clickbaity story. So it's no wonder that the media just kind of runs with it when it happens, which
like, you know, it's like double-edged sword, right? Like it's it's media attention, but it's like the
wrong kind. But it does bring attention back to the case. And maybe because of that, maybe
because of something else that's happening that we don't know. I do know that just in November of 2024, Janette
and Gabriella's case got reopened as a double murder investigation. And the one thing they said is they did this based
on inconsistencies that they found in witness statements, which like which witnesses
when? Yeah. Would love to know. But like we're 7 8 months now into the reinvestigation and
they haven't shared much more than that. Like I spiral and I'm like okay are we talking witnesses that get tied up in
this like art whatever? Are we talking about like the people in the town? Like there's so
many options for I know witnesses. I know. And if what we need is stuff from witnesses like time's running out
to get to the bottom of this mystery. Steven is still alive as is Gabriella's daughter Joya. But so many people, some
witnesses included, maybe even suspects, are being lost. Two families, have been
waiting for answers for over 40 years now. And according to a Joya told an Italian news outlet last year, hope is a
hard thing to have anymore. I mean, she's been let down too many times. But she also said that knowing the truth,
like whatever the truth is, it might finally lift her burden that she's carried for over 40 years. So, if anyone
listening has information about Janette and Gabriella's case, it's not too late to come forward. You can contact the
local prosecutor's office in Italy. And we are going to list their contact information right in the show notes. You
can find all the source material for this episode on our website, crimejunkypodcast.com.
You can also follow us on Instagram at crimejunkodcast. We'll be back next week with a brand new
episode. [Music]

Today, we unravel the chilling mystery of the “Giallo dei Sibillini,” the 1980 disappearance of Jeannette Bishop May, former wife of banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, and her assistant Gabriella Guerin in Sarnano, Italy. On a snowy November day, the two women vanished after driving into the Sibillini Mountains during a snowstorm, leaving behind a car buried in snow and a trail of unanswered questions. Found 14 months later near Lake Fiastra, their deaths—possibly from hypothermia or murder—sparked theories of Mafia ties, a Roman jewelry heist, and even Vatican connections. With the case reopened in 2024 as a double murder investigation, we dive into the eerie details, local legends, and new leads that continue to haunt this unsolved Italian mystery.

For even more stories like this one, join the Crime Junkie Fan Club today: https://crimejunkiepodcast.com/fanclub?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=episode_description&utm_campaign=signupfanclub

Follow Crime Junkie: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/crimejunkiepodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CrimeJunkiePodcast/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/CrimeJunkiePod Crime Junkie is created and hosted by Ashley Flowers.

About Ashley Flowers Ashley Flowers is the top female podcaster in the U.S. and the host of Crime Junkie, the #1 podcast among women and the #1 true crime podcast globally. As the Founder of audiochuck, she has built a top-tier podcast production company that has garnered over 2.6 billion downloads, captivating audiences with its gripping storytelling through 10+ chart topping podcasts. Ashley and her team are dedicated to creating responsible true crime content that respects victims and their families.

Follow Ashley: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ASHLEYFLOWERS/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/ash_flowers TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ashleyflowerscrimejunkie Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ashleyflowers.af/

Check out these other great crime channels: @rottenmangopod The Moment Diddy Finds Out He’s “Not Guilty” On Major Charges https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2ko5hL6QNk @KendallRae She Called 911 Mid Abduction & They Didn’t Save Her: The Case Of Denise Amber Lee https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_V7yGHtk9w @CoffeehouseCrime The ‘Parasite’ Who Murdered His Victim - Then Pretended to Be Him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zrTLen2uNw @annieelise Sadistic Teen Boys Plan BRUTAL Attack on Their Friend, Kimberly Proctor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZblCemiuKk

Brief Summary

Janette May and Gabriella Guerin vanished in 1980 during a snowstorm, leading to a complex investigation involving ransom theories and art theft connections.

Key points

The Mysterious Disappearance. Janette Bishop May and Gabriella Guerin go missing during a snowstorm in Italy.
The Note's Mystery. A handwritten note found raises questions about Janette's state before her disappearance.
The Telegrams. Two mysterious telegrams surface, one addressed to Janette with an ominous message.
Connections to Art Theft. The investigation reveals potential ties between the women's disappearance and an art theft.
Car Discovery. The women's car is found buried in snow, raising questions about their disappearance.
Conflicting Sightings. Witnesses report seeing Janette and Gabriella on the day they disappeared, complicating the timeline.

Episode highlights

Episode quotes

Why would they wait until 7:20 to leave?

Questioning the women's actions during the storm

4:58WatchJul 3, 2025

Tension

75/ 100High tension

More from Crime Junkie

Solve the Crime

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