Was Brian Wells a Victim?

Christopher Seymour Professor Ann Burgess Victimology November 19, 2012

Seymour 1

INTRODUCTION
Early on the morning of August 23, 2003, Brian Wells walked into the Erie Pennsylvania PNC bank and calmly handed over a note to the teller –‘Gather employees with access codes to vault and work fast to fill bag with $250,000, you have 15 minutes.’ Wells picked up a dumdum lollypop and casually waited. He was armed with a shotgun disguised as a cane and had a large collar brace under his t-shirt that he claimed was a bomb. Quickly apprehended by Pennsylvania State Police, Wells claimed that three African American men forcibly attached the bomb to him, and he was ordered to rob the bank. Though a bomb squad was called, the bomb attached to Brian Wells detonated while he sat handcuffed surrounded by police. The FBI investigation that followed sought to uncover who was involved in the planning, and whether Brian Wells was a victim or conspirator. While the facts of the case suggest that Wells was involved in the bank robbery, the actions of three others – Marjorie Diehl Armstrong, Ken Barnes, and Bill Rothstein caused the plan to spiral out of control and left a deceased Brian Wells as a victim in this tragedy.

SUMMARY OF THE CRIME
On the morning of August 23rd, Brian Wells was working his shift as a pizza deliveryman, the same job he had held since dropping out of high school 30 years prior. According to initial statements by Wells, he was called to deliver two pies to 8631 Peach Street. Upon arriving, Wells claimed that three African Americans forcibly attached a collar bomb around his neck, gave him a shotgun disguised as a cane, and ordered him to follow a series of clues if he hoped to survive. His first command was to rob the PNC in Erie for $250,000 and follow a series of notes detailing his next objective. Wells walked into the PNC branch, handed the teller a note detailing his demands, and casually waited. The teller handed over

Seymour 2

$8,000 from the cash drawer, and Wells exited the bank, only to be apprehended ten minutes later. While fleeing, Brian Wells stopped the car and retrieved a note from underneath a rock near a McDonalds drive-through. The Pennsylvania State Police handcuffed him in the middle of the road, secured a perimeter, contacted the bomb squad, and began listening to Wells’ elaborate story from a distance. Special Agent Gerald Clark, a bank robbery expert, was called in to supervise. Wells claimed he was the victim of a sick game, and needed help. Though attached to a bomb, Wells stayed very calm, even asking an officer to call his boss so he would not be fired for missing work. Twenty minutes later, the device began to beep. For the first time, Wells’ attitude began to change. He began panicking and telling officers that the bomb was about to go off if no one helped him. Unsure of any bomb procedures, the police waited for the bomb squad to arrive before taking any action. Unfortunately, the squad arrived three minutes too late. The beeping increased rapidly before the bomb exploded, blowing a fist size hole through Brian’s chest. Though the disaster was over, the police were only at the beginning of uncovering the truth behind this bizarre case.

SUMMARY OF THE INVESTIGATION
In the days following the incident, Special Agent Mary Ellen O’Toole was called in to act as co-lead on the case. Many questions remained unanswered. “What, for instance, was the purpose of the scavenger hunt? Why send a hostage hopping around Erie in broad daylight? Why scatter clues in public locations where they might be discovered? How was Wells chosen to be the hostage?” (Schapiro). The authorities had very few leads to start. They began with the letters found in Wells’ car. Handwritten, addressed to ‘Bomb Hostage’, they supported the story detailed by Wells that he was sent on a wild scavenger hunt. Analyzing the scene at Peach Street, Wells’ tire tracks were found, and the initial call to the Pizza Place

Seymour 3

was confirmed, originating from a payphone. Examining the bomb itself, analysis showed that it was made with many D.I.Y. at home pieces, including a combination lock, kitchen timers, shotgun powder and many wires. Bomb experts agreed that the device was never intended to be removed. The bomb’s creator sought to kill Brian Wells. Three weeks later, while the case began to run cold, a 911 call came in from Bill Rothstein, a resident of Peach Street. He claimed that he had been involved in a murder, and the body was in his freezer, a victim of Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong. Police investigation found the body claimed by Rothstein, along with a note – “This has nothing to do with the Brian Wells case” (Schapiro). Shotgun shells of the same type as the bomb were also found in Rothstein’s house. The man in the freezer was Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong’s boyfriend, and she was arrested for the murder. The FBI began looking deeper into Rothstein’s past. He fit the profile of the bomb maker perfectly, serving as a shop teacher at a local school and working part time as an electrician; Rothstein had all of the experience needed to craft the one of a kind bomb. Unfortunately, Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong was labeled mentally unstable, and placed in a Psych Ward, out of reach from FBI interrogation. Making matters more difficult, Rothstein was diagnosed with leukemia, and died shortly after, leaving investigators empty. However, June 2004 brought new evidence to light. A local locksmith called the FBI claiming that Rothstein was in his shop a couple weeks before the incident asking about complex combination locks similar to those used on the bomb. In addition, Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong was released from the Psych Ward and wanted to talk to police, in hopes of cutting a deal. In exchange for a transfer to a new prison, Marjorie DiehlArmstrong detailed the incident with FBI, mentioning the kitchen timers used in the collar bomb, a detail only known to investigators at this time (Mandel). She claimed that Rothstein was the mastermind behind the plan, but that Ken Barnes assisted. Though the name had not previously arisen, the FBI found his name listed in Wells’ address book. The story began to

Seymour 4

come together as police pieced together the connections between Brian Wells, Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong, Bill Rothstein, and Ken Barnes. According to testimony from Armstrong and Barnes, Armstrong was a prostitute who would frequently visit Wells. Barnes served as the liaison for the meetings. Marjorie DiehlArmstrong, short on money, constructed a plot to murder her father to collect inheritance. She enlisted the services of Bill Rothstein, but his fee for the murder was $125,000. Marjorie, no stranger to crime, plotted to rob the PNC bank to pay for the hit. Their only missing piece was lonely Brian Wells. Barnes, Rothstein and Armstrong enticed the easily manipulated Wells into serving as their robber. The plan dictated to Wells was that he would have a fake bomb attached to him on the day of the robbery, causing panic within the bank and allowing him to quickly get the $250,000 and escape. Wells even sat for fittings of the collar bomb multiple times before August 23rd. The money would be split between the four. Unknown to Wells, Rothstein sadistically fashioned a shoddily made collar bomb intended to detonate while attached to Wells. On the day of the robbery, Wells resisted having the real bomb attached. The three forced it upon him, locked it with a key, and told him it would be removed after he completed a series of tasks detailed in the notes. It still remains unknown whether the three ever intended to remove the bomb from Well’s neck. In 2007, a grand jury indicted Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong to life plus 30 years for conspiracy, armed bank robbery, and using a destructive device. Barnes was sentenced to 45 years for conspiracy to commit an armed robbery (Slackman). Rothstein, who deceased years earlier, was not mentioned in the decision. Brian Wells, previously believed to be an innocent victim, was labeled a conspirator in the case. The investigative team, struggling for nearly 4 years, finally found and punished those responsible. While Armstrong still claims that she never knew Brian Wells, it was clear to the jury that along with Barnes and

Seymour 5

Rothstein, the three were the main conspirators in creating the twisted game Brian Wells was subjected to join.

MEDIA BIAS
The media were involved in this case from the instant Brian Wells exited the PNC Bank. Coverage surrounded the police investigation as Wells sat handcuffed in broad daylight. Many video accounts caught the explosion occurring, and the ensuing response. Rapidly, reporters tried to determine whether Brian Wells was a victim or conspirator in the robbery and ensuing death. In the hours following the explosion, some sources, with 9/11 in fresh memory, began to speculate that the bomb might be a result of a terrorist group (Johnson). While the FBI remained confused following the tragedy, sources began to release that Wells was an innocent victim in the crime – “Law enforcement sources said last week that investigators have no evidence that Wells was willingly involved in the robbery plot” (Johnson). Many of the news sources that were at the scene began to criticize the authorities’ lack of response to diffuse the bomb. ''It's going to go off,'' Wells is heard saying in videotape taken at the scene by a local television station, WJET-TV. ''I'm not lying'' (Slackman). The many reporters hearing the desperate cries for help labeled Wells an absolute victim. As more evidence was uncovered, the media began to put a new story together, detailing the involvement and planning of Rothstein, Armstrong and Barnes. The NY Daily News characterized Armstrong and Barnes as the primary offenders - "’She was motivated by greed and completely characterized by evil,’ Assistant U.S. Attorney Marshall Piccinini said” (Mandel). The media was successful in labeling the main offenders, yet remain mixed in deciding whether Brian Wells should be described a tragic victim, or unlucky co-conspirator.

Seymour 6

The confusion surrounding the case, as well as the morbid death of Wells led most to detail him as the primary victim in the case, disregarding his involvement in a potentially harmful bank robbery. One aspect lacking in the media’s response afterward was the victimization effect upon society that occurred. The massive economic loss (Burgess 19) involved in dedicating so many police officers and FBI agents into discovering the truth behind the case wasted resources that could have been better allocated elsewhere. Without the mystery of who manipulated Brian Wells, this case would have been a simple failed bank robbery. Instead, the bizarre nature of the case necessitated an abundance of resources to discover the truth behind Armstrong, Barnes and Rothstein’s plot. The uncertain nature of the events also victimized the town of Erie, Pennsylvania. Residents who heard or saw the explosion and violent death of Wells were impacted by the horrific and sadistic nature behind the incidents. Fortunately, the justice system prevailed in sentencing Armstrong and Barnes with massive sentences, ensuring that their devious nature would never again result in more crime. The oddity of the crime quickly escalated the unsolved case to a national level. Writers took advantage of the mystery involved, as many accounts of Well’s involvement began to emerge. Since the event, Americas Most Wanted has featured the crime in three separate episodes as new evidence emerged. Anderson Cooper 360 covered the story among other national news stations, and more recently the events were parodied in the comedy movie 30 Seconds or Less , detailing almost exactly what had occurred (though the cast claimed no prior knowledge of the events surrounding the Erie bank robbery).

Seymour 7

PERSONAL MEDIA INFLUENCE
Although it has been proven through testimony that Brian Wells was an originally willing and able conspirator, I believe he is a major victim in this case. The media was successful in convincing me that Wells was a victim, and through reading the FBI accounts, I believe the media’s spin is correct. Within his community, he was described as “very friendly, very nice, almost child-like” (Barnes). Armstrong successfully corrupted Wells, and through sexual chemistry was able to manipulate the man with an entirely clean record to join into a bank robbery scheme. “Back in high school, according to former classmates, Diehl-Armstrong was known for her dazzling intelligence, and she still possessed an almost encyclopedic knowledge of literature, history, and the law. But over the years, that brilliance had become spiked with madness” (Schapiro). The prostitute and former murderer corrupted Wells into complying with their plan. In addition to Wells’ manipulation, the plan that he originally agreed to was abandoned. Instead, the bomb designed by Rothstein was forcibly attached, and Wells was placed into a situation under which he never agreed. Wells never intended for any real danger to be present within the plan. Aside from robbing the money, the plan would either result in a successful bank robbery, or him being safely captured by authorities. In addition, the early death of Rothstein leaves many questions unanswered. We are largely unsure of the motives behind Rothstein’s involvement, but can assume from his agreement to murder Armstrong’s father that he mirrored the maniacal and sadistic traits resembled in Armstrong’s profile. Overall, Brian Wells fits well into the victim based theory of a “victim with minor guilt and responsibility due to his own ignorance” (Burgess 77). Brian Wells, with some preponderance and examination, should have known better than to conspire to join the bank

Seymour 8

robbery plot. However, being a high school dropout who lived a solitary life, he was easily manipulated into believing he should join the group’s plan. Brian Wells is a victim of being too ignorant to realize the dangers surrounding his involvement. Even if the plan had proceeded as planned, and a real bomb was never attached, it is likely that he would have been caught by authorities and been abandoned by the group when questioned by the police.

CONCLUSION
This is a sad story. My interpretation of the media coverage leads me to the conclusion that Armstrong and Rothstein were the major conspirators, who had absolutely no regard for the life of Brian Wells. The motives behind Ken Barnes are still unclear to me, and aside from his FBI confessions I do not see him as the driving force behind the cruelty and sickness that led to the plan to attach a real bomb to Brian Wells. The major victims are Wells himself, along with the community and resources abused by the plot of Armstrong and Rothstein. I feel that the FBI investigation was as concise as possible, given the circumstances, and the justice system dealt adequate punishments, ensuring that it will be highly unlikely that either convictions will result in Armstrong or Barnes re-entering into society. I believe the media criticism over police response has some basis, but on many levels the circumstances were beyond authority control. Although the bomb squad should have been alerted earlier, it seems evident that the contraption attached to Wells was intended to stay locked, and any intervention could have led to additional casualties. Brian Wells was a victim of manipulation and mistrust. He serves as an example of the potential cruelty in our society, and his involvement in the crime was merely a result of sadistic manipulation.

Works Cited

Seymour 9

Barnes, Kenneth. "Bank Robber May Not Be Perpetrator." WSEE. N.p., 21 July 2005. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. . Burgess, Ann Wolbert. Victomology: Theories and Applciations. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2012. Print. Johnson, Kevin. "Was Pizza Deliverer a Robber or a Victim?" USATODAY.com. USA Today, 17 Sept. 2003. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. . Mandel, Nina. "Marjorie Diehl-Armstrong Sentenced to Life in Prison for Role in So-called 'pizza Robbery'" New York Daily News. NY Daily News, 28 Feb. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. . Schapiro, Rick. "The Incredible True Story of the Collar Bomb Heist." Wired.com. Conde Nast Digital, 27 Dec. 2010. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. . Slackman, Michael. "Bomb Kills Pizza Deliveryman After Arrest in Bank Robbery." The New York Times. The New York Times, 01 Sept. 2003. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. .