48 Hours Tonight

“The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting”: 48 Hours Reports on How Mitchell Gaff Was Caught for the Homicides of Judy Weaver and Susan Vesey October 17 2026

by · October 14, 2026

CBS’ 48 Hours examines how an undercover chewing gum taste test helped solve two brutal murders that had remained unsolved for more than four decades in “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting,” airing Saturday, October 17, 2026, at 10/9c on CBS. Correspondent Peter Van Sant reports on the investigation that connected convicted sex offender Mitchell Gaff to the deaths of Judith “Judy” Weaver and Susan Vesey, two women murdered in Everett, Washington, in separate attacks during the 1980s.

The breakthrough came when Everett Police Department Detective Susan Logothetti revisited evidence from Weaver’s 1984 murder and obtained a DNA database match identifying Gaff as a suspect. Investigators needed a fresh biological sample to confirm the connection. Rather than confront him, undercover detectives posed as representatives conducting a chewing gum flavor survey and persuaded Gaff to participate. The gum he discarded supplied the DNA evidence that led to his arrest.

The investigation expanded to the 1980 murder of Susan Vesey, a 21-year-old mother of two who had been raped and strangled inside her home while her children were present. In April 2026, Gaff pleaded guilty to both first-degree murders. On May 13, 2026, he was sentenced to 50 years to life in prison, bringing a legal resolution to crimes that had left two families waiting decades for answers.

Two Women Were Murdered in Everett Four Years Apart

The murders of Susan Vesey and Judith Weaver occurred in Everett, a city north of Seattle in Snohomish County, Washington. Although the attacks took place four years apart, both women were killed inside their homes and both suffered sexual violence before their deaths.

Susan Vesey was murdered on July 12, 1980, the day after her 21st birthday. She was a young mother with two children, a toddler daughter and an infant son. Her body was discovered inside her apartment, where her children had been present during the attack.

Judith Weaver, known to family and friends as Judy, was 42 when she was killed in June 1984. She was found inside her home on Rucker Avenue after firefighters responded to a fire at the property.

The circumstances of Weaver’s death indicated that someone had attacked her before setting the fire. Investigators found evidence that she had been restrained, sexually assaulted and strangled.

Both investigations generated leads and involved questioning people connected to the victims. Neither produced a murder conviction at the time.

The cases remained separate for decades. It would take advances in forensic DNA analysis and a renewed examination of preserved evidence to establish that the same man was responsible for both deaths.

Susan Vesey Was Murdered the Day After Her 21st Birthday

Susan Vesey was 21 years old when she was killed in her Everett apartment on July 12, 1980. Her death occurred one day after her birthday and left two children without their mother.

Her daughter, Deborah Newton, was a toddler, while her son, Joshua Vesey, was an infant. Both children were inside the apartment when the attack occurred and survived without physical injuries.

According to court records described in subsequent reporting, the attacker entered Susan’s home, restrained her with electrical cords, sexually assaulted her and strangled her.

The crime left investigators with a difficult task. Susan had been killed inside her own residence, but there was no immediate identification of the person responsible.

Police questioned several men during the original investigation, including Susan’s husband, Ken Vesey. His brother Gerry was also questioned in connection with the case.

Neither man was convicted of Susan’s murder. The investigation remained unresolved as the years passed, leaving relatives without an answer about who had entered her home and killed her.

For Susan’s children, the consequences extended across their lives. They grew up without their mother and without knowing the identity of her killer.

Susan Vesey’s Children Grew Up Without Answers

Susan’s daughter, Deborah Newton, and son, Joshua Vesey, were too young to understand the circumstances of their mother’s death when it occurred.

Joshua was approximately three months old. Deborah was a toddler. Their mother’s murder deprived them of the chance to develop memories of her and build a relationship with her as they grew older.

The absence of an identified killer also affected the wider family. Suspicion surrounding the unsolved crime created tensions and uncertainty among relatives.

At Gaff’s sentencing in May 2026, Joshua addressed the court through a remote appearance. He described the loss of his mother’s love and the lasting consequences of the murder.

He also spoke about the confusion and suspicion that had affected his family over the decades. The identity of the killer had remained unknown while relatives attempted to understand what had happened.

Deborah submitted a victim impact statement describing important events in her life that she had wished to share with her mother. Her statement reflected the consequences of losing a parent during childhood.

The family’s statements became part of the sentencing proceedings after Gaff admitted responsibility for Susan’s murder, more than 45 years after her death.

Judith “Judy” Weaver Was Killed in Her Everett Home in 1984

Four years after Susan Vesey’s murder, another woman was attacked inside her home in Everett.

Judith Weaver was 42 years old and lived on Rucker Avenue. In June 1984, she returned home from work and became the victim of a violent assault.

According to investigators and court records, the attacker beat Weaver, sexually assaulted her, restrained her and strangled her. Her wrists were bound with ligatures, and she was left inside the residence.

The killer set a fire in Weaver’s bedroom in what prosecutors described as an attempt to destroy evidence of the crime.

Firefighters responding to the blaze discovered her body. The investigation revealed that her death was not caused by the fire but was the result of a violent attack.

The fire complicated the collection and interpretation of evidence. Investigators examined the property and considered several potential suspects, but the case did not lead to an arrest for murder.

Weaver’s death left adult children, siblings and other relatives confronting the loss of a woman whose killer remained unidentified.

For decades, her family had no resolution. The evidence preserved from the original investigation would become central to identifying Gaff nearly 40 years after the murder.

The Two Murder Investigations Remained Unsolved for Decades

When Susan Vesey was killed in 1980 and Judy Weaver was murdered in 1984, forensic DNA profiling was not available to investigators in the form used by modern criminal laboratories.

Detectives relied on witness statements, physical evidence, fingerprints, crime scene reconstruction and information obtained from interviews.

The absence of a DNA identification method limited investigators’ ability to connect biological material recovered from a crime scene to an individual suspect.

In Weaver’s case, police questioned several men but did not identify Gaff as the killer. The evidence did not produce a prosecution, and the case became a cold investigation.

The Vesey case followed a similar course. Investigators examined people connected to Susan but did not establish who had entered her apartment and attacked her.

Both murders remained unresolved through decades of developments in forensic science. The preserved evidence, including materials used to restrain the victims, offered an opportunity for future testing.

The eventual resolution depended on investigators returning to that evidence with methods capable of recovering and comparing DNA that could not have been analyzed in the same way during the original investigations.

Mitchell Gaff Had a History of Violence Against Women

Mitchell Gaff was not identified as a suspect in either murder during the original investigations, but he had a criminal history involving violent sexual attacks against women.

In November 1979, months before Susan Vesey’s murder, Gaff attacked a 29-year-old woman in Everett. According to court records, he had noticed the woman while she was mowing a lawn and selected her as a target.

The woman, Jacqueline O’Brien, was attacked inside her garage. Gaff beat her and attempted to restrain her wrists, but she fought back and escaped.

O’Brien helped police identify Gaff after the attack. He was charged with assault and burglary and received a sentence involving probation and work release.

In a 1994 interview with a psychologist, Gaff acknowledged that he had intended to rape O’Brien. His account provided evidence of the sexual motivation behind the attack.

Gaff committed further violent offenses during the 1980s. In 1984, approximately three months after Weaver’s murder, he broke into a home and raped two teenage sisters in Everett.

He was convicted in connection with those attacks and served a substantial prison sentence. Later proceedings resulted in findings that he met Washington’s legal criteria for classification as a sexually violent predator.

His history of sexual violence would become significant when investigators identified him through DNA evidence recovered from Weaver’s murder scene.

Gaff Was Convicted of Raping Two Teenage Sisters

The attack on two teenage sisters in Everett became a major part of Gaff’s criminal record.

The offense occurred in 1984, months after Judy Weaver’s murder. Gaff entered a residence and sexually assaulted the sisters, leading to criminal proceedings and a prison sentence.

He served approximately 21 years in prison in connection with the sexual assaults, according to reporting by KING 5 and NBC News.

Gaff also underwent psychological assessments during later legal proceedings. A diagnosis of sexual sadism and findings concerning his risk of committing further sexual violence became part of his documented history.

In separate proceedings in 1994 and 2000, juries determined that he qualified as a sexually violent predator under Washington law.

He was confined at the McNeil Island facility, which houses people subject to Washington’s civil commitment system for sexually violent predators.

Gaff’s prior convictions meant that his DNA profile became available through the criminal justice system. That profile would prove decisive when investigators revisited evidence from Weaver’s murder.

For years, however, the existence of his criminal record did not lead police to connect him with the two unsolved homicides.

Detective Susan Logothetti Reopened the Judy Weaver Murder Investigation

The breakthrough in the Weaver investigation came through the work of Everett Police Department Detective Susan Logothetti.

Logothetti examined evidence preserved from the 1984 murder, including the ligatures used to bind Weaver’s wrists. The materials offered the possibility that biological evidence from the attacker had survived.

Investigators submitted evidence for forensic DNA testing. Advances in laboratory methods made it possible to examine material that had been preserved for decades.

In November 2023, investigators received a significant result. DNA recovered from the cords used to restrain Weaver produced a match in the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, known as CODIS.

The database result pointed to Mitchell Gaff, whose DNA profile was available because of his previous criminal convictions.

The match transformed the investigation. A man who had not been identified as a suspect during the original murder inquiry became the focus of the renewed case.

Detectives now had a potential link between Gaff and evidence from the crime scene. They needed to obtain a fresh sample connected to him to confirm the result and strengthen the evidence for a criminal prosecution.

How DNA From the Crime Scene Identified Mitchell Gaff

CODIS allows law enforcement agencies to compare eligible DNA profiles recovered from crime scenes with profiles held in criminal justice databases.

When investigators examined the material from the ligatures used to bind Weaver, the resulting DNA profile was compared against records in the system.

The November 2023 result identified Gaff as a potential contributor to the biological evidence.

The significance of the finding was substantial. Weaver had been restrained during the attack, and the ligatures were connected to the crime itself. DNA recovered from those materials could provide evidence linking a person to the assault.

Investigators nevertheless sought a fresh biological sample from Gaff. A direct comparison would allow forensic specialists to evaluate the relationship between his DNA and the profile recovered from the crime scene.

Obtaining that sample without alerting him became the next challenge.

Detective Logothetti and her colleagues developed an undercover operation intended to collect DNA from an item Gaff would discard after use.

The plan involved chewing gum, a product capable of retaining saliva and the cells needed for DNA analysis.

Police Designed an Undercover Chewing Gum Taste Test

In January 2024, undercover investigators approached Gaff while posing as representatives involved in developing or evaluating chewing gum flavors.

The operation was presented as a consumer taste test connected to a proposed gum product for Safeway. Investigators used the appearance of an ordinary market research activity to encourage Gaff to participate.

The officers offered him chewing gum samples and asked him to evaluate the flavors. Gaff accepted the invitation without knowing that the encounter was part of a murder investigation.

After chewing the samples, he discarded the gum into a dish supplied by the undercover team.

Investigators collected the discarded material and submitted it for forensic testing.

The operation avoided the need to confront Gaff about the murder investigation before obtaining a fresh biological sample. It also reduced the possibility that he would refuse to provide DNA after learning that he was a suspect.

The gum contained saliva and biological material suitable for DNA extraction. Laboratory analysis allowed investigators to compare the sample with evidence recovered from Weaver’s murder scene.

The result confirmed the connection between Gaff and the DNA evidence associated with the 1984 killing.

Why the Chewing Gum Sting Was So Important

The undercover operation became the defining feature of the investigation because it turned an ordinary consumer product into a source of forensic evidence.

Chewing gum can retain saliva and cells from the mouth. Those cells contain DNA that forensic laboratories can extract and compare with other biological samples.

In this case, investigators had already identified Gaff through a database comparison, but they wanted a fresh sample to strengthen the connection.

The undercover officers obtained the material through a staged taste test rather than requesting that Gaff submit a sample for a murder investigation.

The discarded gum gave investigators a biological sample connected to Gaff’s participation in the operation.

Its DNA profile matched the evidence recovered from Weaver’s murder scene, supporting the conclusion that he had been involved in the attack.

The operation demonstrated how advances in forensic science could be combined with undercover investigative methods to resolve crimes committed before modern DNA profiling existed.

The chewing gum evidence became a key part of the case that led to Gaff’s arrest in 2024.

Mitchell Gaff Was Arrested for Judy Weaver’s Murder in May 2024

Following the DNA confirmation, investigators moved forward with the murder case against Gaff.

In May 2024, he was arrested and charged in connection with the 1984 killing of Judith Weaver.

The arrest came approximately 40 years after Weaver had been found dead inside her Everett home.

The prosecution’s case relied on the DNA evidence recovered from the ligatures and the fresh sample obtained during the undercover chewing gum operation.

Investigators also examined Gaff’s criminal history, including his previous convictions for sexual violence and the attack on Jacqueline O’Brien in 1979.

The similarities between those offenses and Weaver’s murder became part of the broader understanding of his history.

At the time of the arrest, the prosecution concerned Weaver’s death. The investigation into Susan Vesey’s 1980 murder had not yet produced a DNA connection to Gaff.

That second breakthrough would follow a renewed examination of evidence from Vesey’s case.

A Family Contact Helped Reopen the Susan Vesey Investigation

The investigation expanded in January 2025 after Ken Vesey, Susan’s husband, contacted Detective Logothetti.

Ken informed the detective that his brother Gerry, who had been questioned during the original murder investigation, had died.

According to court records, Logothetti was not familiar with the Vesey case before the contact. She began reviewing the investigation and examining the evidence preserved from Susan’s murder.

As she studied the case, she identified similarities between the 1980 killing and the murder of Judy Weaver.

Both women had been attacked inside their homes. Both had been restrained with electrical cords, sexually assaulted and strangled.

The similarities raised the possibility that the same offender had committed both crimes.

Logothetti arranged for physical evidence from the Vesey investigation to be submitted to the state crime laboratory.

The evidence included a piece of white electrical cord used to bind Susan during the attack.

The decision to test that material produced another significant development in the investigation.

DNA Evidence Connected Gaff to Susan Vesey’s Murder

In April 2025, Detective Logothetti received information from forensic specialists concerning DNA recovered from the electrical cord used to restrain Susan Vesey.

The laboratory reported strong support for the proposition that Gaff had contributed DNA to the evidence.

The finding connected a man already charged in Weaver’s murder to another killing that had remained unsolved since 1980.

Investigators continued examining the evidence and developing the case against him.

In March 2026, Logothetti received further confirmation that the DNA profile from the Vesey evidence matched Gaff.

The result established a forensic connection between Gaff and both murder investigations.

The significance extended beyond the laboratory findings. For more than four decades, Susan’s family had lived without knowing who had killed her, while the investigation had generated suspicion involving people who were not responsible.

The new evidence identified the same offender who had been linked to Weaver’s murder through the chewing gum operation.

Prosecutors moved forward with the case against Gaff for Susan’s death, adding a second first-degree murder prosecution.

Gaff Admitted Killing Both Women

The investigation culminated in April 2026 when Mitchell Gaff pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder.

On April 16, he admitted responsibility for the deaths of Judith Weaver and Susan Vesey in open court.

According to the Everett Police Department, Gaff provided details about the crimes that were consistent with investigators’ findings.

He acknowledged that he had killed both women and that he had not known them before the attacks.

His admissions resolved a central question in both investigations: the identity of the man who had entered the victims’ homes and committed the murders.

The guilty pleas also meant that the cases would not proceed to contested jury trials on the murder charges.

The court still had to determine the appropriate punishment, taking account of the age of the crimes, the sentencing laws applicable to them and Gaff’s criminal history.

The admissions brought an end to decades of uncertainty for the victims’ families, although the emotional consequences of the killings remained.

Mitchell Gaff’s Sentencing Hearing Took Place in May 2026

On May 13, 2026, Gaff appeared in Snohomish County Superior Court for sentencing.

Family members, friends and survivors attended the hearing, which lasted several hours. The court heard statements describing the consequences of the murders and the decades during which the victims’ relatives had waited for answers.

Prosecutors argued for a substantial prison sentence based on the seriousness of the crimes and Gaff’s history of sexual violence.

Defense attorneys requested the minimum sentence available under the older Washington sentencing laws applicable to crimes committed before the state’s current sentencing system took effect.

The judge considered the legal framework, Gaff’s criminal history and the repeated acts of sexual violence documented in his record.

The court also heard from Jacqueline O’Brien, the woman who had survived Gaff’s 1979 attack.

Her testimony connected the sentencing proceedings to a pattern of violence extending back before the murders of Vesey and Weaver.

The hearing gave survivors and relatives an opportunity to address the man responsible for crimes that had shaped their lives for decades.

The Families of Judy Weaver and Susan Vesey Addressed the Court

Relatives of both murder victims delivered statements describing the impact of their losses.

Leon Gregory, Judy Weaver’s brother, told the court that more than four decades had passed since his sister was killed. He described family members who had died without learning the identity of her murderer.

Judy’s daughter, Kathy Myers, submitted a statement explaining that she had been 20 when her mother died. She described the lasting effect of the murder and the fact that her children had never known their grandmother.

Another daughter, Colleen Kayser, described the years spent wondering who had attacked and killed her mother.

Judy’s niece, Dawnyel Wilder Harris, urged the court to impose the longest sentence available.

Susan Vesey’s children also addressed the consequences of the crime. Joshua Vesey spoke about losing his mother when he was an infant and the uncertainty that had affected his family.

Deborah Newton described the milestones in her life that she had been unable to share with Susan.

The statements illustrated how the murders had affected multiple generations. Children grew into adults, families experienced further losses, and relatives spent decades without answers.

The identification of Gaff provided a resolution to the criminal investigations but could not restore the relationships that had been lost.

Jacqueline O’Brien Described Surviving Gaff’s 1979 Attack

Jacqueline O’Brien, who survived an attack by Gaff in 1979, also addressed the court during the sentencing proceedings.

O’Brien was a former law enforcement officer who had been attacked inside her garage in Everett.

Gaff had beaten her and attempted to restrain her, but she fought back and escaped. Her actions helped police identify him following the assault.

At the 2026 hearing, O’Brien described the fear she experienced during the attack and the effect it had on her life.

She told the court that she believed Gaff intended to kill her. Her testimony provided a firsthand account of violence committed by the same man who had admitted murdering Vesey and Weaver.

The attack had occurred before either homicide, making O’Brien one of the earliest known survivors of Gaff’s violence.

Her appearance at sentencing also highlighted the consequences of the earlier criminal proceedings. Although Gaff had been identified and prosecuted for the 1979 assault, he went on to commit further crimes.

The judge considered his history of violent sexual offenses when determining the sentence for the two murders.

Gaff Apologized Before Receiving His Sentence

Before the judge imposed sentence, Gaff addressed the court.

He acknowledged responsibility for his crimes and referred to the role of drugs and alcohol in his violent conduct.

Gaff stated that he had no excuse or defense for what he had done. He also expressed regret for the consequences of his actions and acknowledged that the women he attacked had done nothing to deserve the violence.

His statement came after relatives had described the effects of the murders on their families.

The court had to consider whether his admissions and expressions of remorse warranted a lesser sentence than prosecutors requested.

The judge placed substantial weight on the severity of the crimes and Gaff’s history of sexually motivated violence.

The court also considered concerns that he had minimized or concealed the extent of his criminal conduct during earlier proceedings.

The sentencing decision reflected both the punishment for the murders and the long period during which the families had waited for justice.

Mitchell Gaff Was Sentenced to 50 Years to Life in Prison

The judge rejected the defense request for the minimum available sentence.

On May 13, 2026, Gaff was sentenced to 50 years to life in prison for the first-degree murders of Judith Weaver and Susan Vesey.

The sentence followed his guilty pleas and admissions that he had killed both women.

In explaining the punishment, the judge referred to the decades the families had waited for answers and the seriousness of Gaff’s crimes.

The court considered his history of sexual violence, the circumstances of the murders and his conduct during previous legal proceedings.

The sentence established a minimum term of 50 years before any possibility of release under the applicable legal framework.

Given Gaff’s age at sentencing, the punishment is expected to keep him incarcerated for the remainder of his life.

The outcome closed the criminal prosecutions arising from the two murders, more than four decades after the crimes occurred.

Where Is Mitchell Gaff Now?

Mitchell Gaff is serving a prison sentence following his May 2026 conviction and sentencing for two counts of first-degree murder.

He received a term of 50 years to life in Washington state, making release during his lifetime unlikely.

Gaff had spent substantial periods in custody before the murder convictions because of his earlier sexual offenses and his confinement under Washington’s sexually violent predator system.

His 2026 guilty pleas established his responsibility for the murders of Susan Vesey and Judith Weaver, crimes that had remained unsolved for decades.

The sentencing brought an end to the murder proceedings without the need for contested jury trials.

The available reporting establishes the sentence but does not confirm a specific prison facility for his current incarceration.

His case remains notable for the length of time between the murders and the resolution, the use of preserved forensic evidence and the undercover operation that obtained the DNA sample needed to confirm his identity.

Detective Susan Logothetti’s Investigation Brought Two Cold Cases Together

Detective Susan Logothetti’s work connected two murder investigations that had remained separate for decades.

The renewed Weaver investigation produced the initial DNA database match in November 2023. The undercover chewing gum operation in January 2024 supplied the fresh sample that confirmed the connection to Gaff.

After his arrest for Weaver’s murder, Logothetti reviewed the Vesey case and recognized similarities involving the victims’ injuries and the use of electrical cords.

Her decision to submit preserved evidence for DNA testing produced a second forensic connection to Gaff.

The investigation illustrates the importance of preserving physical evidence from unsolved crimes. Materials collected before modern DNA profiling existed can become useful when laboratory methods advance.

It also demonstrates how a new lead in one investigation can provide the basis for reviewing other cases involving similar methods of attack.

The chewing gum sting attracted attention because of its unusual approach, but the broader investigation depended on decades-old evidence, forensic analysis, criminal records and detailed case review.

Together, those elements produced the evidence that led Gaff to admit responsibility for both murders.

48 Hours Examines the Chewing Gum Sting and the Families’ Search for Justice

48 Hours revisits the case in “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting,” with correspondent Peter Van Sant examining how investigators used a staged consumer taste test to obtain evidence from Mitchell Gaff.

The episode explores the murders of Judy Weaver and Susan Vesey, the years in which both cases remained unresolved and the forensic developments that connected Gaff to the crimes.

The investigation also highlights the role of Detective Susan Logothetti, whose review of preserved evidence led to a DNA database match and whose subsequent work helped establish a connection between the two murders.

The case reached its legal conclusion in 2026, when Gaff admitted killing both women and received a sentence of 50 years to life in prison.

For the victims’ families, the outcome answered a question that had remained unresolved for more than 40 years. The conviction identified the man responsible, while the sentencing proceedings gave relatives an opportunity to describe the lives affected by the murders.

48 Hours: “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting” airs Saturday, October 17, 2026, at 10/9c on CBS, following “The Corn Rake Witness.” Peter Van Sant reports the investigation, which will also be available to stream on Paramount+.

More “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting”

More Feature Articles

Avatar photo

Ryan Gill

Ryan is a passionate follower of true crime television programs, reporting on and providing in-depth investigations on mysteries in the criminal world.

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Who Was Susan Vesey & What Happened to Her? 2026 Update & Profile - 48 Hours Tonight
    October 14, 2026

    […] “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting”: 48 Hours Reports on How Mitchell Gaff Was Caught fo… […]

  2. Who Is Mitchell Gaff & Where Is He Now? 2026 Update & Profile - 48 Hours Tonight
    October 14, 2026

    […] “The Detective & the Chewing Gum Sting”: 48 Hours Reports on How Mitchell Gaff Was Caught fo… […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *