On February 9, 1979, Esther Gonzaleza 17-year-old girl of Latin origin, began a short but unfortunate journey from her parents’ house in Beaumont to his sister’s house in BanningCalifornia. It never reached its destination. The next day, a man called authorities to report finding a body partially covered by snow on the side of Highway 243.
The body was Esther’s and her death, marked by extreme violence, shocked the small community. She had been raped and brutally beaten before being abandoned at the scene, she said. CBS News.
The man who initially appeared as a crucial witness in the case of Esther Gonzalez was Lewis Randolph “Randy” Williamson. Despite having been a key figure in the investigation of the missing young woman, his behavior during the first moments of the investigation raised certain suspicions.
Williamson, who had called to report the discovery of the body, was somewhat strange in his behavior when interacting with the authorities. Investigators described his attitude as “argumentative,” a detail that led officers to identify him as a person who should be asked more questions.
Days after his statement, the authorities decided to subject the suspect to a polygraph examalso known as lie detector testa tool that was frequently used at the time to help rule out or confirm the involvement of potential suspects. The subject agreed to undergo the test and, passing it without problems, was exonerated officially, at least at that time, of any connection with Esther’s murder.
This result, backed by the technology of the time, seemed to put an end to suspicions about Williamson. However, forensic science in 1979 did not have tools such as ADN to confirm suspicions, which left the case in a gray area, with an unsatisfactory resolution. Meanwhile, the investigation continued without being able to clarify who the real culprit was.
Decades after the tragic death of Esther Gonzalezthe advancement of forensic technology allowed the case to be resumed with new tools. In 2023, a team specializing in unsolved homicides from the riverside county decided to again analyze the evidence collected at the crime scene, this time using the power of forensic genetic genealogy.
The process began with the review of a semen sample collected in 1979 and archived in the genetic identification system known as CODES. Although this system had not previously produced matches, the introduction of forensic genealogy allowed family connections to be explored through commercial genealogical databases. To do this, the team collaborated with the company Othram, Inc., located in Texas.
One of the key elements was the determination that the initial suspect, Williamsonhad never been ruled out through DNA testing, since this technology did not exist in 1979. Although the suspect had died in Florida in 2014, investigators managed to obtain a blood sample from his autopsythanks to the collaboration of Broward County Sheriff’s Department.
This sample was sent to California Department of Justicewhere specialists confirmed an exact match between Williamson’s DNA and the genetic material found in Esther’s body.
In this case, the authorities have made it clear that they do not rule out the possibility that Williamson may have been linked to other similar crimes, and they have urged the public to provide any additional information about him. This has renewed hope that, through this technology, other unsolved murders or even identify other victims who may have been in situations similar to Esther’s.
