Murder on Good Friday: An Unsolved Birmingham Cold Case (Quinton, 1957)

0:00President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop them by voting yes by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide not politicians. Vote yes by April 21st. Paid for by Virginians for fair elections. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Jamba. Jump in at JambaCasino.com. Let's Jamba. No purchase necessary, VTW Group. Void were prohibited by law. CCNC, 21 plus sponsored by Jamba Casino. President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop them by voting yes by April 21st.

1:01Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide not politicians. Vote yes by April 21st. Paid for by Virginians for fair elections. A woman walks into a sweet shop on Easter Thursday, 1957. The owner silently mouths something to her. No words spoken. Just a signal. 11 hours later, he's dead. Skull crushed. Bundled into his own van while still breathing. Boys find his body buried under twigs the next morning. And his dog. His dog is found alive days later at the exact same spot. The only witness who saw everything but can't tell anyone what happened. And here's what makes no sense. The woman vanishes forever, never identified. A child finds the murder weapon covered in blood. Then a tall stranger in a hat follows him. The boy throws it away, terrified. And the stranger just disappears like he was never there. Police interview thousands. They find nothing. 60 years later, his great nephew reinvestigates

2:01and suddenly, new witnesses appear. So what did that woman know? Why did Fred signal her? And who was the tall stranger? Let's find out. Welcome to Whispers of Crime. Follow Whispers of Crime on Apple podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Speaker, and other podcast platforms for daily updates on every crime and subscribe to our YouTube channel, Whispers of Crime. We are going to be dissecting the evidence and the historical context surrounding the brutal and still unsolved murder of Frederick Walter Jeffs in the spring of 1957. We've sifted through, well, everything we could find, police records, newspaper accounts from the time, and the really detailed research gathered by Fred's own family decades later. It's a devastating story. It's really a portrait of investigative limitations and just an enduring chilling silence. It is. Our victim, Frederick Walter Jeffs, was 37 years old. And he ran a business. A successful one. Jeffs confectionery and tobacco in his shop. It is located at 12 Stanley Road in the Quentin area, right on the edge of the black country region

3:03of the West Midlands. So he was a known figure in the community. He was. But his public persona, it seems, masked a pretty complex private life. And his life was, it seems really fracturing right before the events of that night. You mentioned his marriage was effectively over. That's a crucial detail. Yes. Fred had been married to a woman named Betty for about eight years. But by 1956, the relationship had completely broken down. She'd left. She had. Betty had relocated to Solohol. So Fred was living separately and all the evidence compiled later, mostly by his family, suggests he was leading what you might call a double life. Which involved this social, maybe a romantic connection with an unidentified young woman. The very woman at the heart of this entire mystery. Yes. So you have a successful businessman. But he's emotionally isolated, leading a secret life. It positions him perfectly for a crime that could be rooted in jealousy or exploitation. Exactly. And the day of the murder, it sets the stage perfectly

4:04for some kind of pre-arranged, high stakes meeting. Monday, Thursday. Monday, Thursday, April 18th, 1957. The next day was good Friday, so all the shops would be closed. So his shop would have been incredible busy. Unusually so. It was teaming with customers buying Easter eggs, holiday treats, all the last minute things. A busy, almost chaotic environment. But I suppose one that also provides a certain amount of cover. And multiple customers, people who knew him, noted that Fred's demeanor was highly unusual that evening. He was distracted, preoccupied. Some said noticeably agitated, which was a stark contrast to his normal business-like self. So he was anticipating something for someone. He clearly was. And it seems he didn't want any attention drawn to whatever his private concerns were. And this brings us to the most critical and frankly baffling event of the night. The encounter with the mystery woman. A dark-haired young woman entered the shop. She was described as being in her late teens or early 20s. And then the silent signal.

5:04Tell us about that signal. Why is that one moment so vital to this whole case? Well, according to witnesses, Fred appeared to wordlessly mouth something to her. No verbal exchange at all. None that anyone heard. No request for service, no casual greeting. Just a wordless movement of his mouth, which implies some kind of coded communication. Or a pre-arranged instruction. Exactly, an instruction about when and where they would meet later that evening, outside of the public eye of the shop. That immediately suggests knowledge and urgency. If Fred just wanted to arrange a later meeting with, say, a girlfriend, he could have whispered a time or scribbled a note. The silence suggests he feared being overheard, perhaps by specific people who might have been listening in that busy shop. It could suggest the danger was already present or imminent. It's the analytical pivot point, isn't it? It applies a sensitive, possibly dangerous rendezvous that required absolute discretion. And this woman was either deeply complicit in Fred's secret life, or she was the one setting the trap.

6:05That's what the police thought. They immediately identified her as the key witness, or perhaps the key accomplice. The problem was nobody knew who she was. So the silent signal happens. The woman leaves, Fred closes up his shop for the holiday. What's the next concrete piece of evidence we have about their movements? The last confirmed sighting of Fred Jeff's alive happens much later. Around 11.45 p.m., a witness spots Fred's vehicle. It was a very distinctive, small Austin A30 van parked outside his shop on Stanley Road. And was he alone? No. The witness saw a man who we have to assume was Fred in the driver's seat. And crucially, the dark-haired woman was seen emerging from or standing right near the vehicle. So the silent signal worked. They met outside the shop alone nearly four hours after he would have closed his doors. It confirms contact was made as arranged right before midnight. Given how agitated he was earlier in the evening, what does that tell us about the priority

7:05he placed on this meeting? It speaks to the absolute dominance of this commitment over his own personal safety. He knew something was wrong. He was visibly distracted, which suggests he knew the appointment was potentially risky, yet he felt compelled to keep it. Whether she was threatening to expose him or something else entirely. Whatever it was, Fred clearly assessed the risk and decided to proceed. That 11.45 p.m. sighting places the mystery woman and Fred together inside or right next to that Austin A30 van. At the precise moment, the crime window opens. And within minutes, everything turns brutally violent. The shift from that intimate coded meeting to extreme violence is incredibly rapid. And what's the timeline on that? The coroner's report, based on the estimated time since death, placed the murder at approximately midnight right on the transition from Monday, Thursday into good Friday. Now we know his body was discovered miles away. Was the initial attack at the place where he was found? No. The forensic evidence strongly contradicts that.

8:06The initial attack almost certainly occurred at or very near Fred's van likely while they were still right there on Stanley Road. How do we know that? Investigators later found blood splatter evidence on the van's windscreen and bonnet. So he was outside the vehicle. It confirms Fred was subjected to repeated violent blunt force blows while he was either standing outside or perhaps trying to get in or out of the van. This wasn't a subtle killing. Not at all. It was a quick explosive and visible act of violence. But the attack happened there, but the murder itself. It was protracted. That detail is so critical. It is, I think, the most chilling aspect of the physical evidence. The rear of that small Austin 830 van showed significant evidence of blood and bonnet. It's forensic proof that Fred Jeff's was not killed instantly by those initial blows. So he was still alive. He was bundled into the back of his own van while severely wounded, bleeding profusely and likely still conscious. The coroner's estimate confirmed he died

9:06during transport or shortly after arriving at the disposal location. Which could have been hours later. It could have been up to 16 hours before his body was even discovered. That journey, the killer driving across the region with a dying, suffering man in the back, it just reveals a calculated, callous determination. This wasn't just rage. It was a horrifying logistical act. It was. It was calculation overriding any basic human compassion. The killer needed to relocate the victim and the van. And the body was found the next day. Good Friday, April 19th, 1957. And the discoverers were not police. They were young boys, just playing in an area known as the wasen. Which is local terminology. Yes, for a specific part of Sanwell Valley, which is situated between Hansworth and West Bromwich. So miles from the sweet shop in Quentin, that's a significant journey to make. A trip of several miles, yeah. It confirms the transport theory. And how is the body found? The friend's body was found in a very shallow grave, hastily and crudely covered with twigs and some masonry

10:08wobble. The concealment was hurried. It was inadequate. The injuries were obvious. Oh, yes. The extensive injuries were confirmed to be repeated, blunt force trauma, all focused on the skull. And the van. It was found somewhere else again. To complete the picture, yes. The Austin A30 van was found abandoned in the early hours of that same, but Friday morning. It was located in Witten, which is another location, geographically distinct from both the shop and the body dump site. The killer created a three-point geography. The attack, the body, the van. Spreading the evidence out, deliberately. OK, we need to discuss the weapon, because this is where the investigation hit, I mean, just an immediate and possibly irreversible roadblock. It did. Weeks after the discovery, a nine-year-old boy came forward with a deeply suggestive, but ultimately lost piece of evidence. What did he find? He reported finding a blood-covered Lori starter handle. A starter handle. So a heavy, irregular piece of metal. Exactly. Used to manually crank heavy vehicles.

11:09And he found it in the spinny, very near where Fred's body had been discovered. That's a nasty opportunistic weapon. It's heavy, blunt, and designed to transmit enormous force. It fits the type of injury blunt force trauma perfectly. However, the police in 1957, they could never conclusively match the specific dimensions or pattern of that handle to the injuries on Fred's skull. So they couldn't be sure it was the weapon. While the wounds were characteristic of blunt force, they couldn't be definitively traced back to that specific handle. It was suggestive, but not conclusive. And then the boy, he panicked and lost it. He did. And the circumstances around why he lost it introduced the second major mystery man in this case. The tall man. The boy claimed that shortly after finding the blood-stained handle, he was approached or followed by a tall man, distinctively dressed in a trill-be-hat and a macintosh. And the boy was terrified. He threw the handle away and ran, and that tall man just vanished. Never identified, never linked to the crime,

12:10but strongly suspected to be the perpetrator watching the scene. That is just an investigative tragedy. The potential murder weapon covered in blood, likely containing trace evidence, is lost forever because a child was terrified by the probable killer. It's a huge loss. What specific forensic analysis was lost to the 1957 police by the loss of that object? The loss was monumental. In 1957, DNA was. It was just a concept, not a tool. However, blood analysis relied heavily on the ABO blood-grouping system. OK. Had they secured that handle, they could have determined the blood group of the victim, which they knew, and critically, any traces of the perpetrator's blood if he was injured during the fight. Right, it could have at least narrowed things down. Exactly. While ABO grouping is broad type A, B-O-A-B, it could have significantly narrowed the suspect pool had they ever identified the tall man. And the physical pattern of the weapon would have been preserved. Without the handle, the police relied on general medical reports, making it nearly impossible to definitively connect any future suspect to the means

13:12of death. The tall man, the probable killer, was literally protected by a terrified child and the limitations of forensic science. And there's one final haunting element to physical evidence, or rather, the living witness, Fred's dog. Fred's dog, named Perro, which is just Spanish for Dog, provides a unique, employment detail. He was found alive. Perro was discovered alive on Easter Sunday, days after the murder. Where was he found? Right there. In the Sanwell Valley, near the location where Fred's partially buried body had been concealed. So the dog was, by default, the only known silent witness to what happened. To the events that unfolded that night and the subsequent concealment, yes. Why was the dog there? Did the killer just leave him? Or did he follow the van somehow? Its presence, days later, raises some deep questions. If the killer transported Fred to the wasen and buried him, did they also just abandon the dog there? Or, and this is perhaps more unsettling, did the killer return to the scene later?

14:14Maybe to check the concealment or less likely to release the dog? Which would suggest an intimate knowledge and a lack of fear about returning. The most emotional reading, however, is simply that the loyal dog followed its master scent and refused to leave the spot where Fred lay. Regardless, the dog couldn't offer any testimony. And its survival remains a profound and mysterious footnote to the tragedy. So the police launched this massive manhunt, and they immediately need a motive. Let's pivot to their initial working theory, which centered on robbery. The robbery theory was immediately viable, yes, because the shop had clearly been disturbed and investigators confirmed that cash and valuables were missing. What exactly was taken? Specifically, around 150 pounds in cash, which is a very significant sum of money in 1957, along with Fred's watch and a radio were confirmed stolen from the premises. So the police working hypothesis was what? That the mystery woman was a calculated lure. Her job was to draw Fred out of the shop at that specified time, the 11.45 PM rendezvous,

15:16which would enable a male accomplice, the tall man, to attack Fred for the day's takings. That structure implies a highly coordinated effort, not just some opportunistic thief, but if the goal was just money, why the extreme brutality in that long, risky drive across the region. And that is the crucial flaw in the simple robbery gone wrong theory. The sheer overkill, the repeated savage blunt force trauma that left Fred alive, suffering and vomiting in the back of the van. It's just disproportionate to simple theft. A typical robber would get the money and run. A typical opportunistic thief would likely dispatch the victim quickly and flee the scene immediately. The sustained violence and the subsequent effort to dispose of the body miles away suggests a motive rooted in something far more personal or far more calculated. It suggests the robbery was staged. To cover the true underlying reason for the murder, that was a strong secondary theory. OK, so let's explore those deeper, more volatile theories. What are the alternative motives that police and later Fred's family focused on?

16:19We can break down the speculative motives into, I'd say, three main categories that move beyond simple monetary gain. Firstly, there's the organized crime or gang involvement theory. This arose precisely because the attack was so coordinated. The lure, the attacker. Exactly. The use of a lure, the presence of a clearly designated attacker, and the efficient disposal of both the body and the vehicle across county lines. Was there much gang activity in the region then? There was documented low-level gang activity in the West Midlands at the time. And significantly, Fred's sister reportedly told investigators that her brother had been frightened in the weeks leading up to his death. Triton. Which suggests he knew he was in some form of danger, perhaps related to deaths or territory. If he was frightened, that points away from a random encounter and towards someone he knew, or someone who was targeting him specifically. But without a direct link to a gang. It lacked documented proof. The police never identified a specific gang or specific individuals who were threatening him.

17:21It remained a strong, logical possibility, a targeted elimination, but it stalled without names. OK, so what's the second theory? Secondly, there is the Italian connection or turf force theory. This is perhaps the one most rooted in local folklore. And it emerged strongly during the later family reinvestigation. What does that theory suggest? It posits that Fred Jeff's running a successful confectionery into back-and-est may have crossed or upset an established player, possibly an Italian dawn or family operation, involved in the ice cream and confectionery business. The 1950s saw intense, sometimes violent competition among family businesses fighting over territory in the black country. The idea is that by setting up shop or doing business in a rival area like Langley, Fred incurred the wrath of a highly organized territorial entity. But wait, if this relies so heavily on folklore collected 60 years later, how do we weigh its importance against the original police suspicion of robbery? Could this just be local myth-making? That is the critical analytical challenge.

18:22There's no official record linking Fred to an Italian dawn or any formal gangland feud. However, what this folklore does confirm is that the local community did not believe the robbery story. I see. They suspected a deeper systemic reason for the execution-style brutality. Something rooted in the serious competitive nature of his trade. So while we have to treat the Italian dawn with skepticism, it validates the belief that the motive wasn't just theft, but revenge or dominance. And the third theory. Finally, we have the romantic jealousy theory. And this is supported by the facts we do know. His broken marriage, his secret life. And the absolute centrality of the mystery woman to his final hours. The premise is straightforward. The dark-haired woman was romantically involved with Fred, and the attack was orchestrated by a jealous rival. Her partner in a strange husband, a family member. Acting out of intense rage or cold calculation. This theory, to me, it perfectly explains the extreme personal brutality we saw. The intensity of that attack suggests blinding rage,

19:24a crime of passion. Precisely. If we look at the violence, the repeated skullblows, the prolonged suffering, it aligns far better with the emotional overreach of jealousy than the clinical efficiency of a gang hit or the quick departure of a simple robber. And the mystery woman vanishing. Her willingness to vanish suggests a loyalty or a fear that protected the actual killer, who was potentially someone she was deeply connected to. So if we weigh these theories, gang elimination, turf war, or passion jealousy, which perpetrator gains the most of the fact that the initial police investigation stalled and failed so quickly. Without question, the perpetrator who benefited most was the one shielded by the silence of the mystery woman. Right. If this was a crime rooted in jealousy or a coordinated hit, the primary objective was not just to eliminate Fred, but to ensure the key facilitator, the law of vanished immediately. And she did. The failure of the 1957 investigation to identify and locate that woman meant the killer and his key associate were able to melt back into the community seamlessly.

20:26President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop them by voting yes by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide not politicians. Vote yes by April 21st. Paid for five Virginians for fair elections. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Jamba by my side. Race to chumpacaceno.com. Let's Jamba. No purchase necessary. VTW group voidware prohibited by law. CTNC's 21 plus sponsored by chumpacaceno. They were protected by the sheer volume of people interviewed and the technological limitations of the era. The initial police response was massive, though. An extensive manhunt spanning multiple county police forces. Yet the investigation just collapsed.

21:26It hit what they called an impenetrable wall of non-information. What were the specific non-technological failure points beyond the inability to find the dark-haired woman? Well, the core failure was definitively that. The absolute inability to identify, locate, or question the mystery woman. She was the singular person who held the key. To his final hours, his secret life, the tall man's identity. Everything. Once that lead dried up, the entire investigation became a search for a phantom killer tied to an unsubstantiated motive. And technology compounded the problem. Massively. As we discussed, there was no DNA analysis. That was decades away. The police relied solely on the limited ABO blood grouping system. So if the killer's blood was present on that starter handle or in the van, this technology could only place him in one of four broad populations. Minimal identification power. And there was no modern infrastructure. No CCTV, no digital footprint trace, and fingerprint databases were localized, and well, rudimentary.

22:28Once the physical scene was processed, the investigative trail ran cold almost immediately. And the inquest was held just a week later, which suggests authorities were moving quickly, but they achieved very little. The inquest provided closure for the family in terms of cause of death blunt force trauma, but it yielded no actionable new leads or names. The evidence was suggested. The blood, the van, the lost handle. But never conclusive enough to bring charges against any identified suspect. The failure was systemic and allowed the killer to maintain their silence for over six decades. But we need to acknowledge the persistent efforts to keep this story alive today. Absolutely. And just a quick reminder for everyone listening, don't forget to follow Whispers of Crime on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, I Heart Radio, Spreaker, and other podcast platforms for daily updates on every crime, and subscribe to our YouTube channel Whispers of Crime. Like, share this episode with others who might have information about this case, and help also comment your suggestions below. Drop your positive review and rating. And remember to check out our recent release,

23:28UK Historical Cooled Case like this. For over 60 years, the case of Fred Jeff's sat in the archives officially unsolved. And that silence was finally broken, not by a police cold case review, but by the relentless curiosity and determination of a family member. This is the story of Graeme Rose, Fred's great nephew. What do you do? Graeme Rose, who is a performer and theater maker, grew up with the shadow of his great uncle's violent death hanging over his family. In 2018, 61 years after the murder, he decided to approach the case not just emotionally, but systematically. He used his skills as a researcher and a storyteller. He did. And that's a remarkable transition moving from hearing family whispers to becoming the lead investigator. So what was his specific methodology? Because it clearly unearthed information that the 1957 police force couldn't access. Rose realized that the police's failure was partially due to hitting that wall of silence. So his methodology focused on restoring trust and activating community memory.

24:28How did you do that? He began an extensive, localized research model. Firstly, oral history and community interviews. He conducted hundreds of interviews with local residents in Quinton, Warley, and Langley. People who were around in 1957. People who were children or young adults then. And he approached them not as a detective, but as a family member seeking understanding, building trust over time. And he backed that up with hard research. Yes, secondly, he executed systematic, painstaking, archival research. He meticulously cross-reference the oral accounts against contemporary newspaper archives at the Library of Birmingham and any available police records. So he could separate fact from the local legend? Precisely. And then to accelerate the process and prompt silent witnesses, Rose utilized public media. In 2019, he developed a true crime and war thriller, theatrical production. Fred Jeffs, The Sweet Shut Murder. That's the one. It premiered and toured the black country. A theater project as an investigative tool.

25:29That's innovative. Did staging the narrative of the crime actually cause people to come forward? Absolutely. The theater productions served as a massive public call for information. It allowed witnesses who may have been too fearful or unwilling to talk to the police back in 1957 to finally break their silence after six decades. And that was followed by a podcast series. It was. The community engagement was then amplified by a 2027 episode podcast series under the same name, which went into forensic detail on every facet of the case. And the results were genuinely exciting. They were. The vivid memory of the local residents was striking. Many retained detailed, accurate recollections of Fred, the shop, and the intense atmosphere immediately following the crime. And more importantly, did new witnesses emerge with information about the mystery woman or the tall man? While the identities of those two core suspects remain elusive, the project yielded critical new testimonies and corroborated existing accounts. For instance, individuals who had been silent for decades came forward, including the granddaughter

26:30of one of the boys who discovered the body. And she shed new light on the immediate aftermath. And there was a new name that surfaced, wasn't there? Yes. Perhaps the most intriguing recent development was the emergence of a mysterious name during the podcast investigation, Yan Oksenet. Who was he? This individual provided information that raised new questions about Fred, the associates, suggesting the victim's secret life may have been even more complex and involved more people than previously documented. But his specific role remains unclear. It does. But the fact that a new name, previously unknown to investigators surfaced after 60 years, demonstrates the power of this method. Even with this sustained professional effort by Graham Rose, the essential puzzle pieces still stubbornly resist closure. We have far greater clarity on the context and the failure points, but the core mysteries remain. They do. Rose's work has confirmed the tragedy, but the four crucial questions remain unresolved. First and foremost, the identity and complicity

27:30of the mystery woman. Was she a willing lure for the tall man, a frightened romantic interest, or a forced accomplice? Her testimony is the only thing that can link the attack back to the motive. Second, the identity of the tall man and the trail being McIntosh, the confirmed perpetrator of the attack. He was seen, but his name is still unknown. Third, the precise definitive motive was that that calculated business elimination, the emotional rage of jealousy, or the stased robbery. We still don't know for sure. And finally, the status of the original physical evidence has the blood stain starter handle, or even the limited 1957 blood samples been preserved in police archives. Because the future of any forensic cold case analysis depends entirely on whether those physical fragments still exist. Waiting for 21st century technology. The Fred Jeff's sweet shop murder stands as one of the West Midlands most enduring unsolved cases. The investigative tragedy is just compounded by the fact that the crime itself was so brutal in public, yet the perpetrators vanished completely.

28:32It remains officially unsolved, but critically, murder charges in the United Kingdom carry no statute of limitations. So the door for justice is still open. It remains open waiting for that single piece of new compelling evidence. This case is a painful lesson in investigative history, isn't it? It illustrates how the inability to identify one critical person combined with the limitations of mid-century forensic science can render a case virtually impenetrable. The killer was protected by the timeline, the crude nature of the concealment, and that technological gap. Yet the persistence of family Gramrose's commitment to truth through community storytelling shows that time doesn't necessarily erase memory. It merely requires a new, innovative way to access it. The stories pass down the oral traditions that persist in Quentin Warley. They often heard details that were too ephemeral or dismissed by the initial police reports. They are the living archives of the crime. A truly remarkable effort. And a final reminder, don't forget to follow Whisperers of Crime on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

29:35I Heart Radio, Speaker, and other podcast platforms for daily updates on every crime, and subscribe to our YouTube channel, Whisperers of Crime. Like, share this episode with others who might have information about this case and help, also comment your suggestions below. Drop your positive review and rating. Remember to check out our recent released UK Historical Cold Case like this. The dark-haired woman was last seen within nearly Austin A30 van just before midnight. Whether she was the killer's partner, a terrified lure, or simply a witness. She was the last person to see Fred Jeff's alive before the assault that killed him. She walked away from man who was still breathing, bleeding, and suffering in the back of his own vehicle. The only way this 1957 case is ever truly solved is if that woman, or someone who knows the truth of her movements that Monday, Thursday night, finally breaks their decades-long silence. She holds the key to the fate of Frederick Walter Jeffs. President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power

30:36for two more years, but you can stop them. By voting yes, by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide not politicians. Vote yes, by April 21st. Paid for by Virginians for fair elections. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to chambacasino.com, let's Chamba. Don't purchase necessary, VTW Group. Void we're prohibited by law. CTNCs, 21 plus, sponsored by Chamba Casino. President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years, but you can stop them. By voting yes, by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide not politicians. Vote yes, by April 21st.

31:37Paid for by Virginians for fair elections.