The gruesome legacy of the Boston Strangler still haunts the streets of Boston like that one creepy uncle nobody wants to talk about at Thanksgiving. Between 1962 and 1964, 13 women were murdered in their apartments, most of them sexually assaulted and strangled with their own stockings or robes. Talk about turning the mundane into murder weapons.
I’ve been obsessed with this case since college (while my roommates were plastering their walls with boy band posters, I was creating a timeline of the Boston Strangler murders—we all have our quirks). What fascinates me most isn’t just the brutality, but how they eventually caught Albert DeSalvo—and whether they actually got the right guy.
The Perfect Storm of Terror
Boston in the early ’60s was experiencing a collective panic attack. Women were installing multiple locks, traveling in groups, and basically treating every man like a potential killer. Can you blame them?
The victims ranged from 19 to 85 years old—a spread that made profiling nearly impossible. Some were sexually assaulted, others weren’t. Some apartments were ransacked, others left pristine. The inconsistency screamed “multiple killers” to me from day one.
The police were drowning in tips, theories, and suspects. They interviewed over 300 people, including—get this—several men who actually confessed falsely. (Imagine wanting attention so badly you’d claim responsibility for 13 murders. Yikes.)
How They Nabbed DeSalvo (Spoiler: It Wasn’t for Murder)
Here’s where it gets weird. Albert DeSalvo wasn’t arrested for the Boston Strangler murders at all. He was caught because of an entirely different crime spree—a series of sexual assaults where he posed as a modeling agent.
DeSalvo was actually arrested in November 1964 for breaking into a woman’s home. She described him to police, who realized he matched the description of the “Green Man” (named for the green work clothes he wore) who had sexually assaulted hundreds of women in the Boston area.
(Ryan always points out that this is why you should never trust a man in a uniform you didn’t call. Solid advice from my normally crime-oblivious husband.)
After his arrest, DeSalvo started confessing to the Strangler murders while in jail—not to police, but to his cellmate George Nassar. His attorney, F. Lee Bailey (who later defended O.J. Simpson—talk about a career trajectory), helped arrange a formal confession in exchange for avoiding the death penalty.
The Confession That Raised More Questions Than It Answered
DeSalvo’s confession was as messy as a crime scene before the forensics team arrives. He knew details about the murders that weren’t public knowledge—like the specific positioning of victims’ bodies and the exact knots used in the stranglings.
But he also got major details wrong. He described killing victims in ways that didn’t match autopsy reports and mixed up crime scene details. These inconsistencies are like finding a blonde hair at a crime scene when your suspect is a redhead—they just don’t add up.
Some criminologists believe DeSalvo studied the Boston Strangler cases extensively before confessing, possibly coached by other inmates who had access to case files through their attorneys. (The prison grapevine is basically Wikipedia for criminals.)
The Plot Twist That Changed Everything
For decades, the case remained technically unsolved. DeSalvo was never actually charged with the Strangler murders—he was serving life for the Green Man sexual assaults when he was stabbed to death in prison in 1973.
Fast forward to 2013—nearly 50 years after the murders—when investigators finally got what every true crime junkie dreams of: DNA evidence. They exhumed DeSalvo’s body and compared his DNA to seminal fluid found on the body and clothing of the final victim, 19-year-old Mary Sullivan.
It was a match. Case closed, right?
Not so fast. One DNA match doesn’t prove he killed all 13 women. In fact, many criminal justice experts still believe multiple killers were responsible, with DeSalvo possibly committing some of the murders while copycats or opportunists committed others.
Why I’m Still Not Convinced
I’ve spent countless nights poring over case files (while eating Cheetos in my pajamas—true crime isn’t always glamorous), and I’m still not 100% convinced DeSalvo acted alone, if at all, for most of the murders.
The victims had nothing in common except being female and having doors they could lock but apparently didn’t. The murder methods varied wildly. Some scenes were meticulously clean, others chaotic.
Would the same killer strangle an 85-year-old with a pillowcase one week, then sexually assault and murder a 19-year-old college student the next? It’s about as consistent as my workout schedule (which is to say, not at all).
And why confess to crimes that would get you the death penalty when you’re already serving life? The cynical answer: money. DeSalvo’s family stood to profit from book and movie deals if he was the infamous Boston Strangler.
The Lesson We’re Still Learning
The Boston Strangler case reminds us that even the most infamous serial killer cases aren’t always what they seem. DNA evidence has confirmed DeSalvo’s involvement in at least one murder, but the full truth may be messier than the neat narrative we’ve been fed.
Would I have survived in 1960s Boston? Probably not—I forget to lock my door half the time even knowing what I know about crime statistics. But I would have definitely had my own suspect board and timeline on my apartment wall.
What do you think? Was DeSalvo the sole Boston Strangler, or was he taking credit for other killers’ work? The debate continues, and like any good murder mystery, the truth might be hiding in plain sight.