Glenn reacted before they had fully explained the accusation. “Me?” he asked. He became defensive and repeatedly insisted he had never threatened Edward and had no reason to harm him.
Detectives noticed how quickly his denial escalated. They asked why Paris had been reluctant to tell them she had a boyfriend. They reminded Glenn that he had recently returned from prison, had been communicating with Paris while incarcerated, and now appeared to be minimizing any connection to a man who had played a major role in her life.
Glenn denied jealousy. He said there were plenty of women in the world and that he would not kill someone over Paris. He denied ever going to Edward’s house to confront him. In fact, he claimed he did not even know where Edward lived.
Investigators began testing that claim. “There’s no reason your DNA would be in this house anywhere?” one detective asked.
“No.”
“What about on the shell casings that we found at the scene?”
“No.”
They again raised the reports that Glenn had threatened Edward. He rejected them. The detectives suggested one obvious motive: Edward had been living with and financially helping Paris, the same woman Glenn had been involved with from prison. Glenn said that meant nothing to him and continued to deny any confrontation.
At that point, detectives did not have a lab result or eyewitness statement placing Glenn inside the house. They had testimony from Stacy about Edward’s earlier assault and death threat, Paris’s evasiveness, inconsistent answers about her car, and Glenn’s own contradictions. It was enough to make him a serious suspect, but not enough to charge him with murder.
So they tried one final pressure point: technology.
Detectives told Glenn that phone records and tower data could eventually reveal which devices had been in the area around Edward’s house. They explained that a tower dump could return thousands of numbers but that investigators could compare known phones belonging to Glenn, Paris, and people around them.
They asked him whether any of those phones would show up near Edward’s house on Halloween.
“I don’t believe so,” Glenn replied.
A detective immediately focused on the wording. “You don’t believe so? You keep saying you don’t believe so?”
Glenn then strengthened the denial. He said he had been with Paris that day. His story was that they had spent Halloween together, including taking Paris’s children trick-or-treating. If investigators reconstructed their movements, he insisted, they would see that they had been together and nowhere near Edward’s residence.
The detectives warned him that cameras, phone records, and other digital evidence often revealed details witnesses did not expect. Glenn did not change his story. With no physical evidence tying him to the scene and no confession, investigators had no lawful basis to hold him for Edward’s murder.
They let him leave.
For Edward’s family, that was the beginning of a long and painful wait. Edward was buried in a local cemetery. Because of the condition of his injuries, the funeral was held with a closed casket. His relatives knew investigators had a possible suspect and several disturbing statements, but suspicion could not substitute for evidence.
The case remained open. Detectives continued revisiting witness statements, comparing accounts, and searching for something objective that could place Glenn at Edward’s home on the night of October 31, 2023. Paris and Glenn both had reasons, in the detectives’ view, to minimize what had happened, and neither was giving them the admission they needed.
The breakthrough came from the very technology detectives had warned Glenn about during his first interview.
Investigators obtained historical cell-site information and began reconstructing the locations of devices associated with the people in Edward’s orbit. By comparing tower activity with the known timeline, they found data that contradicted the stories Glenn and Paris had given them.
According to the investigation, Glenn’s phone connected in a way that placed it at or in the immediate area of Edward’s house on the night of the murder. The same man who had repeatedly said he had never been to Edward’s home now had digital evidence tying his phone to that location.
That changed the case. Detectives finally had something independent of witness memory, rumor, or relationship conflict. The phone data did not by itself explain exactly what happened inside the house, but it gave investigators a concrete contradiction they could use in a second round of interviews.
On March 5, 2025, detectives brought Paris back in. Nearly a year and a half had passed since the murder. This time they knew far more than they had during the doorstep interview in November 2023.
They confronted Paris with the new information and asked again about Halloween night. At first, she did not provide the account they were seeking. She continued to deny being near Edward’s house and remained guarded. Yet detectives again saw the fear and hesitation that had marked the original conversation.
They released her without a confession.
Two days later, Paris called them back.
She wanted to return and tell them what she said had actually happened.
The new statement changed the case from a collection of suspicious circumstances into a narrative that could be presented to a grand jury.
Paris said that on Halloween night she and Glenn had been arguing. Edward was outside his house, apparently waiting to see her children in their costumes. Paris described Edward as a major figure in the lives of her family. His house had been arranged in ways that made her feel welcome, she said. He had bought things she liked, including a television, food items, and alcohol, and had tried to make the home comfortable for her.
According to Paris, she was in the car with one of her children when Glenn got out. Glenn approached Edward and asked to use his bathroom.
Edward let him inside.
Paris stayed in the vehicle. She said she had been drinking and was already upset with Glenn. After the two men entered the house, she heard several popping sounds—roughly four or five, according to her statement. At first, she tried to tell herself she had heard something else.
Then Glenn came back outside.
Paris said he grabbed her by the collar, forced her back into the vehicle, and they drove away. She confronted him while they were leaving, telling him she knew he had done something serious. Glenn, according to Paris, claimed he had only been trying to scare Edward.
Paris said she did not immediately accept that Edward was dead. She tried calling him the next day and again afterward. Her children also attempted to reach him because Edward regularly helped them, drove them places, and was unusually dependable.
The silence was completely out of character.
Paris told detectives that another friend later relayed something even more alarming: Glenn had allegedly told someone that he had killed Edward. That information, combined with Edward’s absence from work and the police activity around his home, made Paris fear that the worst had happened.
She said she drove past Edward’s job and did not see him there. Edward was a consistent worker, she explained, and his absence made her uneasy. Later, she went by his house and saw investigators outside using equipment. By then, she said, her heart had sunk. When detectives contacted her, the death was confirmed.
Paris admitted she had not told investigators the truth in 2023. Her explanation was fear. She was afraid of Glenn, afraid of what might happen to her children, and afraid of being labeled a snitch. That fear, she said, had kept her silent even though Edward had been important to her and her family.
Detectives then asked about the gun.