Random Man Linked to Teens Killed on Camping Trip

What a senseless, violent act. The. murder of two young teenagers. while out camping. Two teenagers were shot and killed while. camping on Mount Ord in Arizona, allegedly by a random stranger. And. months of investigation have led police. to one suspect, 31-year-old Thomas. Brown. But how did they connect him to. this scene? tips from campers, DNA. evidence, it all raised red flags. We.

are going to break down exactly what. investigators found, what it all means, and we're going to do it all with a. retired police sergeant. Welcome to. Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm. Jesse Weber. [Music]. This is the kind of press conference. that no sheriff ever wants to hold. I wish I didn't have to stand here and. talk about. this case. What a senseless, violent.

act, the murder of two young teenagers. while out camping. Then comes the parents worst nightmare, knock on a door by a sheriff's detective. to tell them. that their child is dead. That was Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry. Sheridan and he was announcing the. murders of two teenagers, 18-year-old. Pandora Schulzroode and 17-year-old Evan.

Clark. Both shot and killed while simply. camping on Mount Or a summit in the. Tanto National Forest in Maricopa. County, Arizona. Well, now months after. their tragic killings, investigators say. they have their suspect, Thomas Brown, a. man whose DNA, according to police, was. found in the victim's SUV and on gloves. that were stained with blood. At his. first court hearing, prosecutors laid it. all out. >> Both of these victims were shot multiple.

times. Brown's DNA is found in the. victim's SUV. Brown's DNA is found. inside of the gloves with the blood on. the outside. And now there is this newly. released probable cause affidavit and it. is revealing even more chilling details. about this story. So with an arrest. made, new court documents unsealed, we. are getting our clearest look yet at. what police say happened on that. mountain. And this all started on. Memorial Day weekend, May 25th, 2025, when these two friends, Pandora and.

Evan, they had plans to camp overnight. on Mount Or. And that is when everything. changed. The next day, when their. families couldn't reach them, a call. came in. A call came in to the Hila. County Sheriff's Office reporting them. missing. And in fact, police detailed. their response during a press conference. on Friday, October 3rd. >> On May 26, the Hila County Sheriff's. Office received a call for service about. an overdue party located in the Mount. Orord area. Mount Orard is a uh is a. popular camping location and a mountain.

uh in the Tano National Forest. It's off. state route 87 somewhere between Mesa. and PAC. The complainant advised that. advised GCSO that her daughter was out. camping with friends and her last known. location was on in Mount Ward. The. complainant also provided pictures for. us of her daughter's camping trip which. she had received. Deputies went out. searching and that is when things took a. turn. They first found Evans vehicle. parked off the roadway, but right away. something wasn't right. deputies. They.

noticed blood on the bumper. They. noticed a bloody pillowcase that was. found inside. And when they searched. further up the mountain, that is when. they discovered drag marks and they were. leading away from a campsite. So they. follow those tracks and when they do, deputies make this grim discovery. >> The sergeant tried to make contact with. any occupants there, but was unable to. And he made some sus some suspicious. observations regarding that car. The. sergeant requested some backup and a.

deputy uh arrived later to uh to assist. him on scene. GCSO deputies did not find. anyone around the vehicle and later. continued their search until they found. a campground up further on the mountain. In that campsite, they noticed. conditions that uh suggested there was. evidence of something being dragged away. from that camp area. They would then. locate the bodies of Pandora Scholes and. Evan Clark who were pronounced deceased. on the scene. Obviously, this is a big. update in this case. And the reason that.

we can bring you this is because of the. incredible support that we get from our. sponsor, Upside. This is the free app. that gets you cash back on daily. essentials like gas, groceries, food. So, I pump my gas, I can use Upside. I. go out to lunch, I can use Upside. Maybe. I get something from a convenience. store, I can use Upside. And why. wouldn't I want to get cash back when I. do all these things, right? This is. actual real cash back. It's money that. appears in your Upside app that you can. then transfer right into your bank. account. So, once you have the free. Upside app, you claim an offer for. whatever you're buying in Upside. You. pay as usual using a debit or credit.

card. You follow the steps on the app, you get paid. To find out how much you. can earn, click the link in the. description to download Upside or scan. the QR code on screen, but make sure to. use our promo code sidebar because. you'll get an extra 25 cents back on. every gallon on your first tank of gas. Quick jurisdictional note here. Because. the Maricopa and Hila County lines run. through Mount Ord, the Maricopa County. Sheriff's Office, they were the ones who. took over the investigation. Now, their. homicide unit would spend months piecing. together what happened in this rugged.

remote area. >> It's been a very difficult case to work. It happened in such a remote area. Uh. they couldn't rely on uh Ring cameras. They couldn't rely on pings from cell. phones and they couldn't rely on any. other video that uh normally we would. have in an urban area. So, it made it. very difficult and a technical. investigation and that's why it's taken. this long to get this far. >> That is until a few major tips came in.

Tips that would lead police to one. suspect, 31-year-old Thomas Brown. Detectives received various tips. regarding this incident over the next. several days and weeks, and one of those. tips revealed that there was a male. subject identified as Thomas Brown, who. advised he had been camping on Mount Ord. on that particular day. Detectives also. received a tip from another group of. campers who they say was camping on. Mount Or the evening of the 25th and. left on the morning of the 26th. That.

tip indicated that the campers um while. they were there encountered an. individual that they perceived as acting. very strangely. The tip from those. campers detailed some very specific. observations that uh caused our. detectives to heighten our focus and. focus our detective our investigative. efforts into Thomas Brown's involvement. in addition to continuing to follow all. the other leads that we had. During an. interview with those same tipsters, they. remembered parts of their outing and. delineated specific facts that resolved.

some of the questions surrounding the. location and position of evidence. gathered at the crime scene. Some of. this information corroborated evidence. pointing to Brown's involvement in Evan. and Pandora's murder. >> Now, when detectives interviewed Brown, he actually admitted he was there. Yeah. He said he camped with his wife, flew a. drone, saw a young male and female in a. silver SUV that matched Evan's car. but. he insisted he never touched them or. their belongings. Here's the problem. with that. The evidence didn't match his.

story. Now, we're going to get into. that. We're going to get into a lot. But. first, so I want to bring in a special. guest right now. I want to bring in. retired police sergeant and author of. the new book Chasing Down the Zombie. Hunter. Troy Hillman is with us right. now. Troy, thank you so much for taking. the time. It's good to see you. >> Yeah, thank you for having me. So from. your experience, how typical is it for. law enforcement to encounter a case like. this one? You're in this Mount Word mur. this Mount Ward area. The victims are in. this remote location. There's little to.

no digital or camera evidence. You know, from my point of view, I I imagine in a. way that might help. It might narrow. down the likelihood of what happened. It. might narrow down a suspect. It's not. like on a busy metropolitan street where. you think, "Oh, this could be a. carjacking or something like this." I. wonder if it helps or hurts an. investigation. I. >> I think you're right. I think Well, I. think both. Um you've got an outdoor. remote location where um people can. easily uh it's somewhat accessible. Um. and you really don't there's no real.

regulations on who goes hiking or. walking or nobody tracks that. So, but. there's lack of there's lack of. surveillance. There's lack of uh things. that normally uh police detectives would. look at to try to to figure out who who. was there to put somebody at the scene. >> And when deputies first discovered this. car with the blood and the drag marks if. you were part of this investigation, what are the immediate investigative. priorities that you have to establish at.

that scene? And what are you looking out. for? >> Yeah, they have to lock down the scene. immediately. um because this the scene. ultimately tells detectives uh what. happened and so if you have it trampled, if you have people kind of rumaging. through say the vehicle, it it's a bad. thing. Um and can actually uh. contaminate DNA and that kind of thing. So locking it down like they did, it was. extremely important and and from what I. can tell, they did a phenomenal job of. doing that. Uh on the onset,

>> you mentioned the DNA. I said this. before. So, police say the evidence in. the case didn't match what Brown had. told him. And they say it was actually. DNA testing that later tied him to the. inside of Evans vehicle. His DNA was. apparently inside a pair of gloves that. were found near the car as well. Gloves. that also contain a hiking path that. Brown claimed to have used. They found. more of the victim's belongings that. were scattered along the trail. Take a. listen. Based on that evidence. collected, Thomas Brown provided false.

and misleading information regarding his. his involvement. It was the comparison. of his statements and that physical. evidence that led us to believe that. um he was apprehended and booked into. MCSO jail yesterday for two counts of. first-degree murder. >> Now, Brown made his first court. appearance last week. We're going to get. to that, but first, Troy, suspects. allegedly providing false or misleading. accounts. How does it work? Do when. someone makes a statement, do you. automatically try to corroborate it? And.

how do you know it might not be, hey, there was a mistake, you know, a simple. mistake in their record and the way that. they told the story versus um maybe. there's an alternative explanation for. why what they said wasn't true versus, okay, this is suspicious. >> Yeah. So, typically as a as a detective, the ultimate for you u when interviewing. is to get a full confession. Um, and. then you kind of work your way down and. then uh basically the next best thing. you could expect would be a full denial.

when it doesn't match what you have as. far as physical evidence. And then you. get into far-fetched stories and uh what. you don't want is you don't really want. silence from the perpetrator and you. don't want um these what I call. plausible explanations. Uh but within. those far-fetched stories and plausible. explanations, you want to kind of figure. out where there, you know, what doesn't. line up and kind of go from there and. kind of look at that. But he was. definitely in the denial far-fetched.

explanation territory. >> That's a piece of the puzzle. I mean, you have right behind you cold cases. matter. And when I'm looking at that and. I'm thinking about a case like this, DNA. is such a critical component. But I do. wonder from an investigative point of. view, what are the challenges? Because. if you have multiple DNA samples that. are present, suspect DNA mixed with a. victim DNA, even advances in DNA testing. I'm sure. it's changed the way cold cases or.

delayed investigations are solved. What. are the challenges when you're dealing. with DNA and a mixture of DNA? D D D D D. D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D. D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D is. powerful as you know um and it it. basically is irrefutable. in that but there are some sometimes. where a perpetrator could explain, hey, yeah, of course, you know, I I came. along later and I I touched X, Y, and Z. Um but if they're it's not lining up. with what they're saying, um then then. there's the problem. So, but uh yeah,

there can be mixtures, there can be. contamination. Uh that's why it's. important to lock down the scene like. they did and collect it um and and be. very careful and they're they're. professionals. They know what they're. doing. So um that it's just again very. powerful tool. And then you also have an. arsenal of uh tools in the toolbox I. call it with fingerprints. You have um. cell phones. Um you have other things. that you can just witness statements to. corroborate all this. And what you're. ultimately trying to build towards is.

this um probable cause, which is a level. of of circumstances and facts that would. lead a reasonable person to believe that. this person committed the crime. So, and. they they obviously got there with. Brown. >> So, let's fast forward to October 2nd. This is when Brown made his first court. appearance in Maricopa County Superior. Court and address the judge. >> All right, sir. You're here on a. Superior Court new case alleging two. counts of murder in the first degree. Um,

I notice that you have an attorney here. He tells me that this is a limited. appearance. Um, [Music]. you did not give any information in. terms of your financial affidavit. Um, are you working? >> Uh, I am working, but currently I own an. LLC and don't have access to my. computer, so I'm unable to work. Okay. You don't have access to your.

what? >> Uh my computer, which is how I run my. LLC. Um. >> are you self-employed? >> Correct. I I own an LLC. >> Okay. Well, I am going to appoint you an. attorney. Now, if you and council work. something out, that's fine. I do want to. make sure that you have an attorney at. your next hearing. And prosecutors also. asked for a significant bond, citing the. severity of the alleged crime, then the. evidence that was collected. >> State is requesting a $2 million cash.

bond due to the gravity of these crimes. The case does involve um as your honor. is well aware from the form 4, the. murder of two teenagers who were. camping. Both of these victims were shot. multiple times. Both of the victims were. moved and concealed in the brush. Uh, as. you noted from the form four, judge, Brown's DNA is found in the victim's. SUV. Brown's DNA is found inside of the. gloves with the blood on the outside. I'm not going to rehash all of the. details from the form 4. Uh, is your. honor asked, Brown does have a a job. He.

runs his own business. Brown also has a. spouse uh who is employed. Say believes. that Brown is a danger to the community, a potential flight risk. And given the. nature of this crime itself, we would. ask for that $2 million cash bond. Thank. you, Judge. >> But Brown's defense, they countered. They counter by pointing out that while. Brown had admitted to being on the. mountain, the affidavit left gaps. Here's what they argued. >> And I had a chance to read the addendum. in this case. And you know, I I was left. with the question in terms of what was. the conduct here that caused the death.

I mean, you have to infer from the form. four. I I understand that, you know, there's mention of Mr. Brown's DNA on. certain items on the scene. He doesn't. deny in the probable cause statement. that he had contact with both of the. alleged victims. He was at camping. he. was there hiking. But importantly, there's little reference to to where the. Mr. Brown's DNA was not found. And. what's interesting is no no mention in. the addendum that they were found on the. shell casings. There's no mention that.

any of the um DNA was found on items. They make mention in the form four that. there were these items along a trail. that presumably Mr. Brown hiked. And yet. these there no DNA on any of these items. that were collected at all. Um there's. reference to a search warrant that was. done here and there was a search warrant. that it the way it's referenced in the. addendum is that it was somehow limited. to fingerprints or was limited to. obtaining his DNA. In fact, there was a. pretty comprehensive search that. occurred months prior to today where.

they searched his residence, they. searched his vehicle, and there's no. reference at all to any that there were. any items that connected Mr. Brown to to. the alleged murder. And so, so, Judge, uh, Mr. Brown, I I understand he didn't. provide any information. He has no. criminal history whatsoever. He's been a. resident of of Phoenix for quite some. time, for, I think, 5 years. He's. married. He served in the military for. 10 years. Um, we'd asked the court to. impose a bond consistent with the.

information that's provided in the. addendum, which again, you have to infer. here that Mr. Brown was somehow. connected to this to this conduct and. and what that conduct was. And so we'd. asked the court to impose a bond that. that is less than 2 million cash. >> Now, the court found that probable cause. existed, meaning there was enough. credible evidence to move forward with. the charges. And the judge granted the. state's request in large part, setting. bond at $2 million, cash only. Additional conditions included no. contact with the victim's families. He.

can't go back to the crime scene. He. can't have any weapons. Troy, do you. think there are gaps here when you. listen to the defense? I mean, it's kind. of a preview of what they would argue at. a future trial, but do you think there. are gaps here in DNA and the. investigation? >> I do. Um, but I I also feel like um the. law enforcement reached that level of. like you indicated probable cause um. that hey, we need to arrest this. individual and get get him off the. streets and um and then things um. basically there'll there's there's.

additional things that'll as it as it. works its way towards the court that'll. be done. Um, so there's more I I think. there's more pieces to the puzzle that. may maybe have not been released that. will be released to the defense at some. point. Um, so, um, we're not seeing the. whole equation, I think. Um, because the. it's up to the prosecutors now to prove. beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a. higher threshold than the probable. cause. Um, but where where the gun is, um, that there are some Yeah, there's. some definitely unanswered questions.

>> Why why is that the case? You the. defense highlights that Brown's DNA. wasn't apparently found on the shell. casings or certain items. How common is. that? How common is that for suspects or. defendants to maybe have DNA present in. some locations or on some items but not. others? Obviously, we cover trials all. the time where defense attorneys jump on. that or they try to suggest perhaps. there's an someone else's DNA there. But. why is that the case? >> Well, shell casings have always been. difficult from my understanding and. talking to the uh the experts over at.

the crime lab. Um there's been different. techniques uh gun bluing and different. types of fingerprint analysis and DNA uh. run those uh but so it gets so hot um my. understanding is that the discharge of. of the projectile that the casing. doesn't always um maintain a good DNA uh. sample. So that that could be that's. always been a challenge. Um so there are. sometimes are not everything's going to. basically have DNA on it. It's not it's. not like in the movies. um where.

everything just kind of works out. Um. there are challenges. Um but if you. have, you know, he places himself there, the witnesses place them him there. Um. his statements are all over the board. and inconsistent with what was found at. the scene. Um the the victim's blood is. on a glove that he's found wearing. So. um yeah, there's, you know, I don't know. if they can prove that he pulled the. trigger at this point. Um, but there's. also a def definite things that he needs.

to explain as what involvement he had. with her death. >> I do want to get into this now. I want. to get into the case that investigators. have built against Thomas Brown and it's. inside this probable cause affidavit. Okay, so it starts with what deputies. first saw when they arrived at Evan. Clark's car. The affidavit reads, "When. a GCSO sergeant arrived in the area, he. located a 1998 Mercedes-Benz vehicle, later identified belonging to V2, that's.

Evan Clark, displaying historic plates. parked off the roadway and between trees. brush." The sergeant stopped to contact. anyone inside and noticed blood on the. back bumper of the vehicle. The sergeant. requested backup and a deputy arrived on. the scene a short time later. GCSO. deputies cleared the vehicle for any. subjects. The sergeant stated the. driver's side doors were locked and the. only unlocked door was the rear. passenger door. While clearing the. vehicle, they noticed a bloody. pillowcase inside. Now, from there,

deputies followed the drag marks away. from the campsite and it led to the. bodies of Pandora and Evan. But the. trail of evidence didn't stop there. because at another site about a mile and. a half away, detectives recovered. something so critical in this case. The. affidavit reads, "In the area where V2's. vehicle was found, detectives located a. pair of gloves left and right. While. processing the exterior of V2's vehicle, detectives noted what appeared to be. imprints on the tailgate area of the.

vehicle, which appeared consistent with. the same groove detail found on the. gloves. The gloves also had what. appeared to be blood on the exterior.". The affidavit also shows how tips from. other campers lined up with the. evidence. It reads, "The tip from the. five campers indicated while camping at. Mount Or, they encountered an individual. who they perceived as being strange. The. tip indicated the male subject they. encountered was driving a blue Kia Rio. and provided the license plate to the. vehicle. After further investigation,

detectives learned the Kia Rio was. registered to Thomas Brown. During an. interview with the five campers. individually, two of the campers. recalled driving up the mountain on the. evening of May 25th, 2025 when they. noticed a blue vehicle parked near a. turn out of the mountain. At the same. time as they drove past the blue. vehicle, they saw a silver Mercedes SUV. driving down the mountain and parked. directly behind the blue vehicle. One of. these campers also said the blue vehicle.

he saw parked in the same area where the. Mercedes was located by GCSO. One of the. campers later saw a blue vehicle driven. by Thomas parked next to their vehicle. and identified it as the same vehicle. they saw by the Mercedes on their way up. the mountain. Uh now let's start right. there. So Troy, they were interviewed. individually. That's the key, right? So. if you're talking about corroboration, if you're talking about their account, how important are they going to be to. this? uh very important. Uh they did they they. did a phenomenal job of of being aware.

of of something happening. Um and. getting the license plate uh getting a. make model on the vehicle. Um so that. that was crucial and yeah keeping them. separate is very important. It's. something standard protocol and police. work that we do. Now, during an. interview with detectives, Thomas Brown, the suspect here, provided a detailed. account of his movements on Mount Orton. Told investigators that he had been. camping with his wife from May 23rd to.

May 26, 2025, but but that she left on. the morning of the 25th while he stayed. behind until the morning of the 26th. Quote, Thomas mentioned on the morning. of the 25th after his wife left, he. drove to the top of the mountain where. he flew his drone. So Brown described. encountering a younger male and female. near a campsite at the top of the. mountain. They were in a silver SUV with. historic plates, a description that. matched the victims and their vehicle. Quote, "Thomas was asked if he ever had. physical contact with the male and. female." Thomas explained during the.

interaction he never had physical. contact with the male or female. According to Brown, he left the campsite. area, drove down the mountain, parked. near a turnout before hiking back up to. the campsite. And while there, he. claimed to have noticed scattered items, including a gray tote with camping. equipment and an air rifle. He admitted. to picking up and rumaging through these. items, but said he put them back where. he found them. Brown said he hiked back. down to the vehicle and returned later. to the campsite where he planned to stay. overnight. By that time, the silver SUV.

was gone. He encountered five other. campers in a white truck with whom he. interacted throughout the evening. And. detectives questioned him about why his. DNA might be found on the victim's. belongings. and he denied any knowledge. of how that could have happened. He also. denied ever entering the SUV. And after. the interview, detectives obtained a. search warrant to collect Brown's DNA, full fingerprints, photographs. Following that, Brown was released. And. of course, we know that he was later. arrested following the results from that. DNA testing. Troy, talk to me about what.

stands out to you regarding his account. >> So, he's he's in that denial phase. um. that is actually good for investigators. because he's saying, "Hey, I was never. inside the vehicle. I was never um you. know, I did do certain things." So then. he's kind of in that far-fetched story. um trying to get to he's trying to come. up with a plausible explanation. Um but. it just it all just to me just didn't. add up um his behavior. Um, and again, I.

think he's uh throwing things out and he. the the denial of inside the SUV and the. the gloves, the gloves with the victim's. blood on it. Um, is is you have to be. able to explain that. >> Look, at the end of the day, from a. human point of view, right, put aside. the law, you put aside the. investigation, what do you have? You. have two teenagers on the edge of. adulthood, their entire lives ahead of. them, gone. Evan's mother, Sandra. Sweeney, shared her grief on a GoFundMe.

page, writing, "Evan wasn't a typical. teenager. He was funny, bright, kind, and entrepreneurial. He was an old soul. who was sensitive, and loving. Evan. wrote me letters, the last of which he. gave me on Mother's Day that was so. touching it made me both laugh and cry. He was special. He deserved a long. life." And for Pandora, her family. wrote, "She had a vivaceious personality. with an infectious smile that brought. joy to so many. She was a beautiful. human being and a bright light in this. world who loved every single person she.

met and had a unique ability to make. every person feel special. As for Thomas. Brown, he has a status conference set. for October 8th. And according to the. Maricopa County public information. officer, the case will go to a grand. jury for an official indictment. Troy, thank you so much for taking the time. Really appreciate it. >> Thank you, Jesse. >> And that is all we have for you right. now here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank. you so much for joining us. And as. always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you. should get your podcasts. You can follow. me on X or Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber.

I'll see you next time. [Music].