I’ve been obsessed with the Boston Strangler case since I was 12 and found my mom’s dog-eared copy of Gerald Frank’s “The Boston Strangler” hidden under a stack of Better Homes & Gardens. (Mom was horrified, but honestly, what did she expect leaving murder books around the house?)
For decades, we’ve been fed the same story: Albert DeSalvo, confessed killer, case closed. But what if—and stay with me here—what if we’ve been wrong this whole time?
The “Official” Story (That’s Full of Holes)
Between 1962 and 1964, Boston women started triple-checking their locks as 11 women aged 19 to 85 were sexually assaulted and strangled in their apartments. The city was paralyzed with fear—I mean, imagine living through that. I would’ve slept with a baseball bat and my finger hovering over 911.
Eventually, Albert DeSalvo, already in custody for sexual assaults known as the “Green Man” crimes, confessed to being the Strangler. Case closed, right? Not exactly.
DeSalvo was never actually charged with the Strangler murders. He was locked up for the Green Man assaults and later stabbed to death in prison. Convenient timing for anyone who might’ve wanted certain questions to remain unanswered.
In 2013, DNA evidence finally linked DeSalvo to the last Strangler victim, 19-year-old Mary Sullivan. The authorities practically threw a parade announcing they’d solved the case after 50 years. But here’s the thing keeping me up at night: DNA from ONE victim doesn’t prove he killed all eleven.
The Multiple Killers Theory (AKA What Makes Way More Sense)
True crime author Susan Kelly spent years researching the case and came to a conclusion that makes my crime-obsessed brain tingle: there were multiple killers, not just DeSalvo.
The victims didn’t share a consistent profile. Some were young, some elderly. Some were sexually assaulted, others weren’t. The murder signatures varied wildly. (Ryan, my husband, always rolls his eyes when I bring this up at dinner parties, but COME ON—this is basic criminal profiling 101!)
The strangulation methods weren’t even consistent. Some victims were strangled with nylon stockings, others with pillowcases, cords from their robes, or even bare hands. Serial killers typically have a signature—it’s like their creepy calling card. These murders scream different perpetrators.
Why Would DeSalvo Confess to Crimes He Didn’t Commit?
This is where it gets juicy. DeSalvo’s motivation for confessing might have been purely financial. He reportedly struck a deal with his attorney F. Lee Bailey to confess in exchange for royalties from books and movies about the case. DeSalvo likely figured he was going to prison anyway for the Green Man assaults, so why not cash in?
Plus, DeSalvo was known for his photographic memory. Police files about the murders were accessible to officers and their attorneys—meaning DeSalvo could have memorized case details without having committed the crimes.
The Consequences of Getting It Wrong
If DeSalvo wasn’t the only Strangler, that means other killers walked free. They might have continued killing elsewhere, or lived normal lives next door to unsuspecting neighbors (which is somehow even creepier).
The tenacious women reporters who covered the case at the time raised questions about inconsistencies that were largely ignored by male investigators. Classic 1960s sexism potentially letting killers roam free—as infuriating as finding out someone ate the last cookie in the break room, except, you know, with murder.
The Lingering Questions That Haunt Me
Could some of the murders have been copycat killings? Was DeSalvo working with an accomplice? Were some of the deaths not even connected to the Strangler case at all?
According to criminal history researchers, the inconsistencies in victim profiles and murder methods strongly suggest multiple killers. The fact that these questions remain unanswered decades later makes my true crime heart both sad and wildly curious.
The Boston Strangler case reminds us that the neat, tidy narratives we crave in true crime often mask messier realities. Sometimes the most satisfying answer isn’t the correct one.
Would I have survived this crime spree? Probably not—I’m terrible at remembering to lock my doors. But I definitely would’ve questioned DeSalvo’s confession with the same skepticism I reserve for people who claim they don’t like chocolate.
Sleep tight, fellow crime junkies. And maybe double-check those locks tonight.