I finished watching this on CD's Vol 4 DVD. Paul Freshour was totally railroaded. The sheriff seemed to have it out for him. Having Paul write those letters for handwriting comparision was bogus. I have a theory about this case. Let me know what you think of it.

I think honestly that the bus driver and superintendant were having an affair before the letters started. It doesn't make sense otherwise.

Personally, I think the sister-in-law is the culprit. My theory is this:

SIL found out about the affair, somehow. Perhaps she and the bus driver were cordial, but not friendly. P'Oed because her brother was getting cuckholded, she sent letters threatening her. The sheriff, I think, was involved with the SIL somehow, perhaps even romantically and helped her with the plan. Perhaps the husband knew about the SIL and sheriff. She was his sister after all. When the sheriff called the husband, that was who he was out to confront that night and he was killed to conceal the identity of the sheriff and/or his sister. (Killing a sibiling to play CYA is extreme, but it has been done).

When the BD got the signs put up about her family, it was when the SIL and her husband Paul Freshour were getting a divorce. She would have access to his gun and would know where he would keep it. He didn't keep track of its' location and she would know that. Who else would have something to gain by framing Paul? At the trial, the BD stated she never suspected Paul until the SIL said something in regards that she suspected it was him. Paul has nothing to gain, but his ex-wife does. Getting a divorce, making him look bad would make her look better. Perhaps Paul stepped out on her or something and she framed him to say 'F You'. The sheriff might have helped her bc he had romantic designs on her, or also hated Paul for a particular reason. Remember, Paul got into his face about the husband's death.

I honestly can't think of anyone else who would have a motive to do this, which is a travesty of justice. His trial was a joke.

to play CYA
huh???

Yeah, I think Paul Freshour is innocent. Since the letters keeped coming after he was in prison, there doesn't seem to be any way that he's not innocent.

I watched the segment again a couple of nights ago on CD's UM favorites vol 4 (thanks again, CrystalDawn). I would need some more information on the case than what the segment supplied to make a better guess, but my insticts say that the superintendent's wife (who was never mentioned) would be the writer of the letters. Since she would have been one of the two people that was being cheated on, and anybody else wouldn't really have a motive, and the other person that was being cheated on ended up dead, there doesn't seem to be anyone else with a motive other than the superintendent's wife. Unless of course, there are suspects that the segment didn't mention, which is highly possible. The superintendent and the bus driver admitted a relationship, but stated that it occured after the letters. I'm not too sure that that's true. I think there's more info about this case than what was on the segment, but since the segment was already one of the longer ones, they might have had to trim it back some.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that several people know who the letter writer is , but will never say a peep in lew of what happened to Freshour and his BIL.....now i'm not accussing anyone in particular but "whenever something's rotten , it starts from the top."

This was just a strange case. The husband goes out after a night of drinking because he is pissed and winds up dead. Then the sheriff tried to say the guy killed himself right? Then Paul wound up prison where he served I think 10 years before being released in 1994. The writer sent a letter to UM and even sent letters to Paul in prison being cocky and talking about how they would never get caught and stuff. This was honestly one of the more bizarre cases I have seen. It seems anyone that deals with that bus driver gets screwed over one way or another. Like the guy seen fiddiling around that was in the El-Camino. They never really followed that up it seemed like.

I too believe Freshour is innocent. For what it's worth, my girlfriend lives about 10 miles from Circleville, and she told me the case is still unsolved, and that the Circleville Writer has apparently been silent for many years now.

You el sickos will pay!:lol:

Hello,
I posted to one of the threads previously but I'm trying to get a copy of this episode. Paul Freshour is my uncle and my father was interviewed for this (but he's not in the episode) but I've never actually seen the segment. I'm trying to get a CD/DVD copy for the family . If anyone cares to copy this for me or direct me to where I can get one that would be great.
Thanks,
Brian Freshour

Welcome Brian. While you're here, would you mind sharing some of your thoughts, ideas, theories, opinions, etc. on the case. You obviously know more than anyone here. Thanks in advance.

Why would the bus driver and the Superintendant acknowledge an affair after the fact when they know it was a hot topic? That didn't make since to me.

And, Brian, I have The Circleville Letter Writer on VHS if you want it, otherwise you may contact crystaldawn for UM Favorites Volume 4 on DVD if you like. The segment is on Volume 4.

Hope that helps.....

Cheers

Okay, this case is a little new to me, so I watched it a couple times. To me, this is the most preposterous case there is! Absolutely ridiculous!!!!

In the beginning, the family sits around and discusses who the writer is, and then the hubby gets a phone call (possibly confirming their suspiscions) and goes after the person and winds up dead. 3 people are still alive who was suspicious of this one person---was this person ever looked into? I find this very odd that he/she is never mentioned, I also find it very odd that no one took part in the segment except Paul Freshour, so the entire segment is Mr. Freshour's side (whom by the way I feel is completely innocent) and here say.

This story almost comes off as a joke because it leaves so many unanswered questions.

Not to mention the bus driver lady and the superintendent admit to an affair, but say it started after the letters started coming. WTF? Why would you even begin an affair when you are getting malicious letter accusing you of one????

This is the most ridiculous case in my mind, so stupid. It's got me all worked up!

Someone mentioned the sister in law being involved. I actually lean towards that idea myself.

Stupid, stupid case.

Sorry :confused:

The one thing I remember is they felt the guy in prison was still sending letters even when he was in prison. Was there any way for them to find out about that?

The one thing I remember is they felt the guy in prison was still sending letters even when he was in prison. Was there any way for them to find out about that?

good point. I would imagine it should have been fairly easy to tell if they were coming from the prison or not. That the letters were still coming in as Paul Freshhour was still in prison, makes me think that he's innocent.

Even though this was one of the longer segments, there's still alot of ground they didn't cover.

I don't believe that the bus driver and principal had an affair only after the fact, it's too much to be a coincidence. I believe they had an affair all along.

I agree:
I do think that they would have been able to tell whether or not the letters were coming from prison. Depending on what level of security he was in, they would screen both his outgoing and ingoing mail. If you are in maximum security, which I think he would have been, you basically have no mail privacy rights.
Haven't seen this case in awhile(I'll have to contact CrystalDawn to get DVD's) but I always thought that there was more to it than people were saying. In a small town, someone has to know something that they either won't are aren't willing to talk out of fear. IMO, Freshour was railroaded, and I'm not saying it was the fault of the sherriff, but the handwriting thing always made everything seem a bit shady.
Before throwing anything else out there, I'll watch the case again to refresh my memory lol :)

The segment does make it seem like Freshour was railroaded, but the segment left out information that I feel would be pertinent in order to decide for sure.

As I have said in other posts, the segment didn't mention whether or not the letters that continued coming after Paul was in prison were authenticated. Were these letters the work of pranksters or copycats? Some of them had to be, imo, since there was such a huge barrage of them going all over the state.

Also, Paul mentions that he knew a man who had an El Camino like the one seen near the booby trap, but the segment didn't elaborate -- no doubt due to fear of lawsuits. This would obviously be pertinent info as well.

I do know that court transcripts are part of the public record, and it would be nice to be able to obtain the full transcripts of Paul's trial.

Well, in the segment, the warden of the prison Paul Freshour was in when the letters were being sent, the warden sent a letter to Paul's wife saying that he felt it was impossible for Freshour to be writing those letters and sending them from the prison.

The letters were being postmarked from Columbus which is only about 30 miles from Circleville where as Freshour was in a prison over 200 miles away from Columbus. The one big thing that sunk Freshour was besides that little scheme by sheriff Radcliffe who is STILL the sheriff there in Circleville. He is not only the longest serving sheriff in Ohio, but might be in the entire country, first elected in 1964.

The sheriff entraped Paul, having him copy exactly the letters that the sheriff had in his possession, I mean, thiat was a joke of an investigation that the sheriff did, he was able to entrap Paul, that little scheme of theirs was in my opinion, completely pre meditated on part of both the sheriff and the prosecutor's office.

The jury was probably full of a bunch of good ole boys loyal to Sheriff Radcliffe, these letters keep getting sent and Radcliff keeps complaining to the Ohio Department of Corrections and they keep transferring Freshour to different prisons all over the state yet the letters keep coming with Columbus post marks?

The one big mistake Freshour made was not testifying in his own defense at his trial. Even I cant completely fault the jury here because they were hearing only one side of the story really it seems. The prosecution was beating up on Freshour pretty good, Freshour didnt testify so basically the jury heard all this evidence against him while all they heard from Freshour's side was "Freshour didnt do it."

So basically the jury only heard one side of the story, a lot of the stuff the prosecution did went unchallenged b y Freshour's defense. Defense attorney's perfer their client not testify a majority of the time, so I am sure that Freshour was just taking his lawyer's advice not to testify. Freshour was an inexperienced suspect so he figured, "why not listen to my lawyer?"

It just seems Freshour was railroaded from day 1, I am not beyond believing that Freshour's own ex-wife was the real letter writer and that she set up Freshour to take the fall for what she was doing. Notice how Freshour was arrested within months of him and his wife splitting up? I dont believe only one person was involved in this crime, there was at least two participants in my opinion.

It is also my opinion the letter writer was someone familiar with the family, close to the family, I mean, I think they would have to be pretty close to Mary Gillespie to know she was having an affair with the superintendent of schools, I do not believe Mary's lie about how she and the superintendent only started the affair after the letters had been sent rather than before. Mary sold Freshour down the river too though to save her own rear end. Do I think Mary was involved in Ron's death? Probably not, at least not directly involved, but I always did feel that the sheriff's department was too quick to eliminate Mary as a suspect and basically acquitt her of any wrong doing.

Mary would have had the biggest motive I would think, to kill Ron, she was cheating on him, if she killed him she could go and be with her lover and collect the insurance money to boot, where as if he found out about the affair that he probably would have divorced her and she would have been in the poorhouse.

But Mary Gillespie would have to be a psychopath on the level of Marie Hilley to send letters to herself, set up her own booby trap, kill her own husband and frame it all on Paul Freshour but I guess it isnt totally impossible.

The fact that the segment didn't divulge any details on why Paul and his wife divorced also doesn't help.

I've always maintained that if Paul wasn't directly involved, then someone who had frequent access to his house was (wife, brother, sister, best friend etc.). There's just no other way that his gun could have been used in the booby trap otherwise. I don't buy into the theory that the letter writer was some outside observer who broke into his house in order to frame him.

Here are the questions I have:

1) How well did the Sheriff know these people, and what relationship did he have with them, if any?

2) Who was the El Camino man and what was his connection, if any, to the family?

3) Why did Paul and his wife divorce?

4) Were any of the prison letters authenticated against the original batch?

5) What details did all of the letters actually contain?

6) Who called Ron's house on the night he was killed? (Phone companies can easily determine this, though it's undoubtedly too late now.)

It is also my opinion the letter writer was someone familiar with the family, close to the family, I mean, I think they would have to be pretty close to Mary Gillespie to know she was having an affair with the superintendent of schools, I do not believe Mary's lie about how she and the superintendent only started the affair after the letters had been sent rather than before.

With this case, there certainly seems to be more questions than answers. Unfortunately, after re-watching the segment (had a tape of it from many years ago), it seems that UM didn't get the info that the needed because I have a hard time believing that they would be intentionally vague with this sort of case.
I must agree with kadrmas15 here in thinking that the letter writer was close. In a small town, rumors spread like wildfire, so I don't even think that the person had to be direct family member either. Just a close observer that had enough information to start the letters.
Another thing I wanted to bring up is that I think the writer has/had a psychopathic mentality. Had their only motive been to destroy the life of Paul Freshour, the letter should have stopped after he went to jail, because the goal would have been acheived. However, the letters continued as if to taunt everyone by saying that the wrong man was in prison. Maybe just to regain control of ths situation. Definately beleive this was more than a one person job, and we will probably just have to wait until someone opens their mouths to find out.

I must agree with kadrmas15 here in thinking that the letter writer was close. In a small town, rumors spread like wildfire, so I don't even think that the person had to be direct family member either. Just a close observer that had enough information to start the letters.

If it was an outside observer, then how did they obtain Paul's gun? Remember, he said he had it hidden in his garage on top of an old refrigerator and underneath a bunch of junk.

This is why I think that either Paul did it or someone within his immediate family did. If neither is true, then it must have been a close friend who would have known about the gun. I don't buy into the theory that it was a nosy observer for precisely the reason stated above.

Well Thiussat, I think we all agree that it wasnt a casual observer that did this. I mean why would a casual observer care in the first place about who Mary Gillespie was or wasnt having an affair with? I get small towns have gossip kings and queens but I just dont think a person that wasnt a family member or a close friend of the family would get this angry and obsessed about this to where they would go to the lengths the letter writer did.

I still do not believe Freshour did it, the evidence just doesnt add up, it didnt add up in 1983 and doesnt add up now. It is still my opinion that it was a HUGE mistake on Freshour's part to testify, I know that is easier to say in hindsight, and it is common for defense attorney's to tell their clients not to testify, but in this case, I think Freshour and his defense attorney's underestimated the state and the lengths they would go to, to get a conviction. I am sure Freshour and his lawyer at the time of the trial and stuff probably never seriously considered the possibility that Freshour would actually be convicted.

In this case they really had no evidence against Freshour that it was him, except for that botched writing test which should have never been allowed in to evidence in the first place. The hand writing expert was biased and got it wrong anyway unless he didnt know that he was comparing letters that Freshour had wrote under the sheriff's direction when the sheriff told him to copy it exactly as it looked, like tracing it basically. Those letters were written in block print so they wouldnt be exactly difficult to copy the style.

The problem was the gun, I think that the jury just couldnt get past that Freshour's gun was used in the crime, because he didnt know who might have taken it, I think Freshour might have been convicted even if he had testified in his own defense, but Freshour did have an alabi for basically the whole day, the day the booby trap was set up and all that, so if the jury had heard that, that he was somewhere else and couldnt have been there setting it up, than Freshour's chances of being acquitted would have gone up dramatically.

But this still doesnt explain who killed Ron Gillespie? I am still not beyond believing Mary was somehow involved. It just seems like the police never looked at her as a suspect despite the fact she was having an affair and lied about it and she was dishonest and misleading in other aspects of the case as well.

Freshour was married to Ron's sister, only when they divorced about a year, maybe even less than that, before Freshour's arrest did his wife start spouting off about how she "always" thought Freshour did it. Mary started saying the same thing after Freshour and his wife divorced and I always found that strange considering for the first 5 years after Ron died everyone acted like everything was fine and Freshour was never considered anymore of a suspect than anyone else until his wife probably harboring sour grapes decided to sell him down the river.

But I do agree that if it wasnt Freshour that did it, than it was someone in his family or a very close friend of his that did do it. Freshour I am sure knows the person who did it, whether or not he knows they did it is unknown but I would be willing to bet Freshour knew quite well the person that actually did this. The Yellow El-Camino should have been followed up, I believe that was owned by the brother of a friend of Freshour's.

This sort of reminds me of the Morris Davis Jr case, where they found that gun that was the gun in the murder, they found the guy that owned it, yet they dont think he did the murder, but I always found that strange how they never were able to find who did it. If the guy that owned the gun didnt do it, than it was someone in his family or a close friend of his who did, how else would they know about the gun and where it was stored?

offtopic for a quick sec, GaryJ06 and Thiussat, what is going on in your avatars?

my bad, completely forgot about the gun thing...probably only a very few people (despite the small town thing) that knew the location of that weapon besides Paul.

Oh, and my avatar is a screenshot from the UM segment of the Belgian police UFO sighting

Thiussat's avatar and mine were meant for each other. His is HAL9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey, and mine is Stanley Kubrick who directed it.

offtopic for a quick sec, GaryJ06 and Thiussat, what is going on in your avatars?

What UM scene is your avi from?

Joshypiano hit the nail on the head in regard to my avatar. Mine is a picture of the ever percipient HAL9000 computer. The HAL series was created in 1991 in Langley, VA and has an ability to be able to solve any problem known to mankind and never commit an error.

In all seriousness, 2001: A Space Odyssey is the greatest film of all-time. If you have never seen it, go out and rent it today

What UM scene is your avi from?

Dottie Caylor waiting for the bus, or at least that's what Jule Caylor wants you to believe. :lol:

there was some eerie music going on when that scene was happening, and it was just such a memorable scene for me.

Dottie Caylor waiting for the bus, or at least that's what Jule Caylor wants you to believe. :lol:

there was some eerie music going on when that scene was happening, and it was just such a memorable scene for me.

So much haunting music in that segment and in special 4 in general. Yet another reason this is my favourite special.

QUOTE=In all seriousness, 2001: A Space Odyssey is the greatest film of all-time. If you have never seen it, go out and rent it today[/QUOTE]

I have everything he did including The Seafarers and Fear and Desire. It is quite subjective to determine what is the greatest film of all time. I think Paths of Glory is the most powerful film he ever did. 2001 showcased his talent best; as he produced it, directed it, co-wrote the screenplay with clarke, and did the Visual effects as well. He got three oscar nominations for it, and took the visual effects oscar hands down.

Pretty much all the UM Directors were influenced by him. The heavy use of ECU is one of the unique elements of UM. You feel like you are face to face with the people when they are interviewed. The tracking camera on the Ghost Segments and shock cuts on the unexplained deaths are very Kubrickian. The sacrifical death scene of Texas most wanted was reminiscent to drago's death in Spartacus. The Kubrick method of employing dehumanizing masks was utilized on the bank robbery segments. Some other influences include the use of vertical camera movement to show confinement, the OS narration of Stack, and the documentarial method of using distinctive music and images over dialogue are all essential to UM. Even friends who never liked UM, always remember the theme music and mysterious scores. :cool:

Some other influences include the use of vertical camera movement to show confinement, the OS narration of Stack, and the documentarial method of using distinctive music and images over dialogue are all essential to UM. Even friends who never liked UM, always remember the theme music and mysterious scores

This is precisely why I am afraid Spike TV will ruin the series if they indeed plan on producing new episodes some time in the future. They have already stated they are ditching the original music and graphics (I can live with new graphics, but they will likely ruin the feel of the show with new music). They will also probably negatively effect the original film with the remastering they intend on doing. One reason I like UM is because of the film used and the often hallowing and enigmatic impression it can leave on the viewer. This will be ruined if the show becomes over "computerized."

If the show is ever revived with new episodes, I hope Spike TV keeps the original vision in mind when producing it. I hope they keep the dramatizations and not go the way of AMW which I find quite boring. Time will tell.

--EDIT-- I should also mention that Spike plans on comprising an episode of 5 segments instead of the traditional four. I am not crazy about that idea either. If a segment is interesting, I don't mind if it takes up 30 minutes or even the whole hour. It seems Spike is trying to get the most bang for its buck; that is, cramming as many cases as it can into an hour episode in order to compensate for the short attention span that many Spike viewers are likely to have.

I can only hope that Spike TV will surprise me and exceed my expectations.

oooh...i don't much like that. I agree that it will ruin the show for me. The theme, and background music is one of the main reasons why the show has stuck with me, and probably why I remember all of the cases that I do. I think that AMW isn't as good anymore with all the new graphics. I also think that they should keep at least one of the two variants of the theme used, the older one I like more, but could deal with the newer one being used.

Back on topic, reading some of this, makes me think that Mary may have sent them to herself, and she and the superintendent intentionally framed it? and then had the Sherrriff help cover it up and frame Paul. If he is innocent which I think he probably is, poor guy. He was even in solitary confinement when letters were being sent.

This is precisely why I am afraid Spike TV will ruin the series if they indeed plan on producing new episodes some time in the future. They have already stated they are ditching the original music and graphics (I can live with new graphics, but they will likely ruin the feel of the show with new music). They will also probably negatively effect the original film with the remastering they intend on doing. One reason I like UM is because of the film used and the often hallowing and enigmatic impression it can leave on the viewer. This will be ruined if the show becomes over "computerized."

If the show is ever revived with new episodes, I hope Spike TV keeps the original vision in mind when producing it. I hope they keep the dramatizations and not go the way of AMW which I find quite boring. Time will tell.

--EDIT-- I should also mention that Spike plans on comprising an episode of 5 segments instead of the traditional four. I am not crazy about that idea either. If a segment is interesting, I don't mind if it takes up 30 minutes or even the whole hour. It seems Spike is trying to get the most bang for its buck; that is, cramming as many cases as it can into an hour episode in order to compensate for the short attention span that many Spike viewers are likely to have.

I can only hope that Spike TV will surprise me and exceed my expectations.

Thiussat, where were you when I posted this about the Spike TV resurrection of the show?:

Me no like.

First of all, the only thing really promised for sure here are re-edits of the old episodes, and it sounds like they are embarking on doing some real hack-jobs:

HBO began knocking on doors last week, offering an all-cash deal for 175 refurbished episodes of the documentary-style series about unsolved crimes and paranormal occurrences... Work is under way to expand the number of unsolved evergreen stories from four to five per episode, each cut down to a maximum of seven minutes. Cosgrove/Meurer and HBO are choosing their material from 900 hours of footage shot for the original 255 episodes.

I assume that the cute little term "evergreen stories" is the subtle way of saying that these re-edited episodes will feature stories largely of the unsolvable variety --- UFOs, Bigfoot, and sea lizards. "Evergren" because, as they are not solvable particularly, they are also never out of date. So, good-bye really interesting stuff like random unsolved murders from the late 80s and early 90s.

I also strongly dislike the idea of editing down old segments to 7 minutes worth of substance. In a general way, I object to the trend in all of entertainment towards breaking things into shorter and shorter segments. Trailers never let you see one continuous image from a forthcoming film for more than 6 seconds. Television commercial breaks are longer, but the length of any individual commercial is dramatically shorter than it once was. Shows in a half hour time slot now barely run more than 20 minutes. Everything is being cut, shortened, and "compressed," and the collective ability of anyone in this country to pay attention to anything for more than 10 consecutive minutes is paying the price. No wonder noone reads anymore.

One of the great problems with UM segments as they stood (as much as I enjoy them) was that they oversimplified situations and distorted facts to squeeze often quite complex stories into 12 minute blocks of time. Now they're going to cut back the "USA Today" version of events UM often gave to seven minutes per story? We just went from USA Today to US Weekly.

The idea of new segments is intriguing, but it sounds distinctly less likely:

Carlin and Cosgrove say that new weekly original episodes are also a distinct possibility and could come as part of the initial deal or at some point later.

I'll call myself "cautiously pessimistic" about this update on my beloved show. If it's beyond all recognition (change the music? are they serious? for the love of God, why?), what's the point? At least 50% of the show's appeal was its gritty, grainy format in those early years.

I posted this several months back in the "A new article about UM coming back! (This is no joke!)" thread, and the silence was deafening. But it seems you and I see eye to eye on this!

The fact that the segment didn't divulge any details on why Paul and his wife divorced also doesn't help.

I've always maintained that if Paul wasn't directly involved, then someone who had frequent access to his house was (wife, brother, sister, best friend etc.). There's just no other way that his gun could have been used in the booby trap otherwise. I don't buy into the theory that the letter writer was some outside observer who broke into his house in order to frame him.

Here are the questions I have:

1) How well did the Sheriff know these people, and what relationship did he have with them, if any?

2) Who was the El Camino man and what was his connection, if any, to the family?

3) Why did Paul and his wife divorce?

4) Were any of the prison letters authenticated against the original batch?

5) What details did all of the letters actually contain?

6) Who called Ron's house on the night he was killed? (Phone companies can easily determine this, though it's undoubtedly too late now.)

I just watched this case again, and I would agree that Thiussat has this exactly right. Firstly, I'm not at all convinced that the death of the husband of the school bus driver was anything other than it seemed: a drunk driving accident. I wonder if the gun might not have accidentally discharged a single bullet at impact. If it was fired by the bus driver's husband before the accident, given his apparently intoxicated state, I don't see any direct reason to believe this was caused by any specific person that he was attempting to kill or wound. Perhaps he fire it accidentally himself while reaching for it, and that's what caused him to lose control of his car.

I also suspect that there was more than one letter writer over the years. Even from the letters they showed on the segment, there appeared to be at least two very distinct styles of writing on display --- and that was among the original letters [i.e., I'm not even counting the ones that were sent much after the fact, to UM, for example, which seemed to be very different from either of the two "original" styles]. This doesn't mean that someone might not have been intentionally disguising his/her writing style in order to make it appear there was more than one writer when there really wasn't, but, given the sheer number of letters sent and the apparently long span of time over which they were sent, I would have to imagine that there were a fair share of copycatters, hoaxers, etc., mixed in with one or two genuine weirdos who started the whole thing.

As to who exactly that was, I do think it's important to conisder, as another poster has already said, that everything we hear about this case comes from Paul Freshaur's point of view, and so naturally paints him in the best possible light. I do, however, find the timing of his ex-wife's accusation that he could be the letter wrtier to be highly suspiscious, as kadrmas15 has already suggested. His wife would have had plenty of motive to be one of the original letter writers (to defend her brother's honor), and she would have had access to the gun that was used to set the booby trap.

It's interesting to me that the UM segement expressly mentions there was another suspect, whose brother, evidently, matched the description of the guy seen at the scene by the other bus driver and who had a car just like the one that driver saw. Why was this person not named?

And why does everyone assume the sheriff here was involved? Granted, that writing sample was bogus, but does anyone have any evidence at all to suggest he would have a reason to help intentionally frame Freshauer?

I just watched this segment, and something just isn't right. When Mary, her husband, her sister, and Paul are all sitting in the kitchen playing their "game" with the letter writer (writing "I know who you are," "I know what you're doing," etc.), how exactly did they send their letters out? How did they know who to send their letters to, if the letter writer wasn't writing a return address on the envelopes?

Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say here?

I just watched this segment, and something just isn't right. When Mary, her husband, her sister, and Paul are all sitting in the kitchen playing their "game" with the letter writer (writing "I know who you are," "I know what you're doing," etc.), how exactly did they send their letters out? How did they know who to send their letters to, if the letter writer wasn't writing a return address on the envelopes?

Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say here?

That's the thing - they DIDN'T know, they suspected one or two people of sending them, and based on that assumption, sent the letter(s).

I just watched this segment, and something just isn't right.

This was always one of my favorite segments...it really makes me glad I don't live in a small town where the drama comes to you in the mail! :lol:


I always thought that the letters were at first a rather silly and elaborate attempt to throw suspicion onto other people and/or to cover up/'fix' a small 'issue' in the writer's life. I think it was something that got out of control - perhaps one or two other people wrote letters as well to 'get things off their chest' and the situation generally escalated from there. That is to say, I don't think that one letter writer is behind all the letters or all the goings-on.

I don't believe that Freshour did it either and am of the belief that someone very close to Mary and Ron Gillispie (sp?) is the culprit. The ex-wife of Freshour, who also happens to be Ron's sister, does seem like a good suspect but I am also very suspicious of Mary and the school superintendent as I too don't believe that their affair began only after the letters started.

I'm going to repost some posts I made in another thread about this case, because I think they shed some light on it and because, for some reason, the thread I posted them in got lost in the shuffle (this thread seems to have become the "official" Circleville Letters thread. The posts follow.

The letter writer obviously knew about the affair. This means that it must have been someone very close to the bus driver. Perhaps the superintendents wife? But if it was her, it would not explain the motive for murdering the husband (if he was even murdered).

The best idea I can come up with, based on facts, is that the bus driver or superintendent (or both) were in on it in order to knock off the husband. They had the perfect person to frame -- the unknown mystery letter writer (who was one of them). They would also know about Paul's gun and where to find it. Of course, this is assuming that the duo was that smart, which I am doubting. However, statistics show that when a married person is murdered that it is HIGHLY likely that the spouse is involved.

If the superintendant and Mrs. Gillispie were the ones behind the letter writing AND the booby trap, as you imply here, then there motive was to 1) perhaps murder Mary Gillispie's husband, and then, AFTER that was accomplished, 2) frame Paul Freshauer for the attempted murder of Mary Gillispie? Why?

I also can't see what Paul Freshauer's motive would be for this whole campaign against Mary Gillispie, if he was the one responsible. He was the soon-to-be ex-brother-in-law of the deceased Mr. Gillispie at the time of the attempted murder of Mary Gillispie. Why would he care what affair she did or didn't have behind the back of her dead husband that he was only related to by a crumbling marriage?

The problem is the weird timing and conflicting events. On the one hand, Mr. Gillispie apparently had some idea of who was behind the harassment, and that person called his house the night of his death, which upset him enough that he drove off in a blind rage and ended up getting himself killed. Yet the only logical motive for the letter-writing harassment belongs to people who by all rights ought to have been on Mr. Gillispie's side in all of this, since they were evidently upset by the affair. Logic would seem to dictate that given the level of agitation that the letters express over the affair, that their author(s) have got to be either the ex Mrs. Freshauer (Mr. Gillispie's sister), one of their kids, or the superintendent's wife, or someone who was close to one of these parties. Perhaps the superintendent's wife and Mrs. Freshauer cooked the whole thing up together.

But if it was any of these people, why was Mr. Gillispie so ticked off at whoever was doing the harassing? Weren't they on his side? Evidently, he didn't think so. So this suggests an entirely different motive/person responsible for the entire thing. But who? Could be Paul Freshauer, but he seems to make the LEAST sense as a candidate --- except it wa shis gun used to make the booby trap!

Confusing, confusing case.

Sometimes, I love being a graduate student, with access to all kinds of fun databases. For those interested, further reading on this case:

LETTERS CONTINUE, RAISING DOUBT ABOUT CONVICT'S GUILT
Columbus Dispatch, The (OH) - December 25, 1986
Author: Robin Yocum, Dispatch Staff Reporter

Shame how things work out

But better you than me:

The sheriff says: You did it:

But we know better dont we:

Excerpt of a letter received by Paul L. Freshour .

Paul Freshour knows that more than a few people think he's crazy. He denies that allegation as adamantly as he maintains his innocence.

"I'm not a criminal, and I'm not crazy," said Freshour , an inmate at the Lima Correctional Institution. "But I'm a convict now, and I don't have much credibility. People tend not to believe convicts."

FRESHOUR WAS sentenced to 25 years in prison in 1983 for attempted murder. He was found guilty of rigging a booby trap to kill his former sister-in-law, Mary Gillespie.

Freshour was arrested after authorities discovered a pistol registered to him in the booby trap.

During his trial, Freshour was linked to a seven-year letter-writing campaign that centered in Pickaway County and, in part, concerned Gillespie. Many of the more than 1,000 letters sent throughout the county spoke of a supposed affair between Gillespie, a school bus driver, and her employer, Gordon Massie, then superintendent of the Westfall School District.

When Freshour was imprisoned, authorities figured the letters would stop.

THEY HAVEN'T. Consider:

Even while Freshour has been in solitary confinement and his mail censored, hundreds of similar letters continue to circulate in central Ohio.

Freshour 's fingerprints were not found on the gun used in the booby trap, the trap itself or any of the letters.

A search of Freshour 's home revealed nothing connecting him to the letters. Also, no construction material used to make the booby trap was found.

A handwriting expert for the state, who linked the letters to Freshour , admitted in court that the samples of Freshour 's handwriting were not properly taken.

Freshour is softspoken and articulate. And he seems an unlikely suspect for an attempted murder charge.

At the time of his arrest he was receiving $52,000 a year as a quality control supervisor at the Anheuser-Busch Brewery. He maintained a home in Grove City and a cabin in Hocking Hills. He had no criminal record.

HE HAS a bachelor's degree from Franklin University in industrial management and business administration and a master's degree in industrial management from Central Michigan University.

Freshour , 44, is broke, and his efforts to free himself are strictly low- budget. His defense revolves around a single issue: Why do the letters continue to circulate?

Since 1976, Gillespie has been the target of the scurrilous-letter campaign. Letters have been sent to various locations in central Ohio - newspapers, law enforcement authorities, judges, government officials, businesses and private citizens.

Pickaway County Sheriff Dwight Radcliff said the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation and Identification had "a whole storeroom full of letters" he had sent over to be analyzed.

Authorities were stumped. They had no suspects.

Freshour and his wife, Gillespie's sister, filed for divorce in late 1982. According to Freshour , it was not a friendly parting.

IN MARCH 1983, a few months before the divorce became final, Gillespie said she found a booby trap along her school bus route. She was alone at the time and no one else saw the trap.

The booby trap, a .25-caliber pistol rigged inside a cardboard box, was attached to an obscene sign that made reference to Gillespie's daughter. The pistol was reportedly rigged to go off when the sign was torn down.

The gun, which never fired, was Freshour 's. Immediately, he was linked to the letters.

At a hearing prior to Freshour 's trial, Radcliff testified that a handwriting expert had linked Freshour to 494 letters and postcards.

Columbus attorney Vincent DePascale, who represented Freshour , said the connection to the letters was almost solely responsible for Freshour 's conviction. DePascale said BCI Document Examiner Stephen Green testified that an examination of writing samples showed Freshour had written some of the letters. However, Green also testified that the handwriting samples were not taken properly.

DePASCALE SAID detectives gave Freshour a copy of a letter and asked him to copy it. Green said the correct method would have been to dictate questions to Freshour and have him write responses.

Green also testified that the number 8, found several times on the letters, was a distinctive blocky style. However, when handed a copy of Freshour 's employment application from Anheuser-Busch, which contained a number of 8s, Green said he could not find one that matched those on the letters.

"After Paul was arrested, they searched his garage and house, but they couldn't find anything to link him to the letters," DePascale said. "There's no doubt the letters were the reason he was convicted. It just overwhelmed the jury.

"They figured the letters would stop, but Paul Freshour has been in prison three years and they haven't stopped yet."

Since Freshour 's imprisonment, similar letters, most with Columbus postmarks, continue to arrive at various Pickaway County businesses, The Dispatch, Radcliff's office, and even at the Lima Correctional Institution.

Although the letters are similar to ones sent before Freshour 's arrest, Radcliff admits he can't determine the source. "We don't have any way to prove they're coming from him," Radcliff said. "There are letters coming out, though. There may be some people out there writing copycat letters."

The letters, some of which were sent on postcards, contained a distinctive block style printing. The O's and parts of other letters are square instead of round. A few of the letters were written in cursive script or typed.

Obscenity is prominent in many letters, as are references to Gillespie, Massie, and Radcliff. Errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation can be found throughout the letters.

"I THINK WE got the right man," Radcliff said. "I know what Freshour wants. He's trying to say, 'Look, I'm in prison, but the letters have never stopped.' All he wants is publicity."

Freshour concurs.

"Wouldn't you want publicity if you were in prison for something you didn't do?" he said.

"They claim my handwriting was on a bunch of the original letters. Well, if it was on any of the recent letters you don't think they'd file some kind of charges against me? The letters are the same, aren't they? Since they haven't filed charges I assume they don't have any evidence against me."

NO OTHER arrests have ever been made.

Radcliff says he has an idea where the letters are coming from, but he won't discuss his theory. Radcliff had said in earlier interviews that he thought Freshour was responsible for the continued letters.

Questioned recently, Radcliff said he had been ordered by Pickaway County Prosecutor William Harsha to answer, "No comment," to any further questions about the letters or the Freshour case. Radcliff said authorities continue to investigate the letters and it is still considered an open case.

Even if Freshour didn't send the letters, it was still his pistol found in the booby trap. Freshour says the weapon had been stolen in a burglary at his house prior to his arrest. The burglary occurred when Freshour was on vacation and he didn't report the gun stolen.

The gun was traced to Freshour through the serial number.

"I'm smart enough that if I'm going to do something, I'm going to do it with your gun, not mine," Freshour said.

Radcliff said he had no doubt that Freshour continued to write letters after he was jailed and had them smuggled out. He would not elaborate.

Freshour said Radcliff won't elaborate because he didn't catch anyone trying to smuggle out letters.

"They were looking to connect me with the letters, so why didn't they charge me?" Freshour said. "I'll tell you why. It's because there were no letters. Sheriff Radcliff made that up."

FRESHOUR SAYS prison policies prevent smuggling or mailing any letters.

Tessa Unwin, a spokesman for the state prison system, said it would be nearly impossible for Freshour to sneak out the letters.

Unwin said all Freshour 's mail, incoming and outgoing, is inspected.

All prisoners are frisked before entering a visiting room. Unwin said Freshour is strip-searched before and after each visit because he has been suspected of writing the letters.

"They keep a real close eye on him and his visitors," Unwin said. "I don't see any way humanly possible for him to sneak out something."

FRESHOUR believes the letters sealed his guilt. If they hadn't been admitted into evidence, Freshour says he doubts he would have been convicted.

"For whatever reason, Sheriff Radcliff believes I'm still sending those letters," Freshour said. "When I'm dead and in my grave people are going to believe I'm sending those letters."

In this version of the story, note that Freshour claims that his gun was "stolen" but he never bothered to report it missing. I don't think that's the story he gave to UM, and it's a good thing, too, because it's lame.

Here's an article from earlier that year, when Freshour's conviction had been upheld:

CONVICTION UPHELD IN BOOBY-TRAP CASE
Columbus Dispatch, The (OH) - March 21, 1986
Author: Don Baird, Dispatch Staff Reporter

The 4th District Court of Appeals has upheld the 1983 conviction of Paul L. Freshour , 43, for the attempted murder of a Pickaway County school bus driver.

Freshour , formerly of Grove City, appealed the conviction, saying the trial judge, Pickaway County Common Pleas Judge William Ammer, was prejudiced.

Ammer sentenced Freshour to seven to 25 years in prison, specifying that he serve at least three years. Freshour is in the Lima Correctional Facility.

Freshour was accused of booby-trapping a sign with an obscene message directed at Westfall School District bus driver Mary Gillespie, his former sister-in-law. The sign was rigged with wire and string to fire a .25-caliber automatic pistol concealed inside a cardboard box.

GILLESPIE SAW the sign Feb. 7, 1983, at an intersection on her afternoon bus route. She removed the box without opening it and turned it over to Pickaway County Sheriff Dwight Radcliff.

In his written opinion affirming Freshour 's conviction, Appeals Court Judge Earl Stephenson said, "There was evidence . . . that the gun was operable, that it had been in ( Freshour 's) possession, that he had taken a holiday (from work) the date of the offense, that similar cardboard boxes to the one at the intersection could be found at ( Freshour 's) place of employment, that the evidence tended to establish that ( Freshour 's) writing was that on the sign, the wood boards and the letters admitted into evidence.

"FURTHER, THE letters demonstrated animosity and ill will toward Mary Gillespie." Stephenson referred to 39 obscene letters mailed to Gillespie from March 1977 to December 1982.

Judge Homer Abele concurred in the decision, but Judge Lawrence Grey dissented. Grey said the prosecution should not have been allowed to present testimony damaging to Freshour from a handwriting expert who had been hired by Freshour 's defense attorney.

"Allowing the defendant's expert to be used by the prosecution has an undeniably chilling effect of the right to competent counsel," Grey said.

"Counsel's ability to independently investigate the case is hampered by the threat that what he finds will be used against his own client."

And here's one from later than the "conviction upheld" article but earlier than the first piece I posted:

BOOBY-TRAPPER IS DENIED NEW TRIAL
Columbus Dispatch, The (OH) - October 15, 1986
Author: Don Baird, Dispatch Staff Reporter

Paul L. Freshour , convicted of attempted murder in a case involving a booby trap, was denied a new trial yesterday.

"I've listened very intently to what both sides have had to say," Judge Glenn Dettling said at the end of a two-hour hearing in Pickaway County Common Pleas Court. "It would be folly for this court to say that there was ineffective counsel, even though you ( Freshour ) in your heart may feel that."

Dettling, a retired Clark County Common Pleas judge, was assigned to hear Freshour 's request for a new trial.

Freshour 43, is serving 7 to 25 years in the Lima Correctional Facility. He was convicted of booby-trapping a sign bearing an obscene message to Westfall School District bus driver Mary Gillespie.

Evidence at his trial indicated Freshour rigged wire and string to a .25- caliber automatic pistol concealed in a cardboard box. Gillespie removed the sign without opening the box when she saw it along the route while driving her school bus on Feb. 7, 1983.

Freshour was represented in his trial by attorney Vincent DePascale of Columbus.

Freshour said DePascale erred in the trial by not having Freshour take the witness stand in his own defense, in changing his not guilty plea to not guilty by reason of insanity, and in failing to hire a private investigator to research the case.

Prosecutor William Harsha argued DePascale's defense of Freshour may have been imperfect but was legally effective.

In March, the 4th District Court of Appeals denied Freshour 's request for a new trial on the basis of judicial error and prejudice.

Notice the interesting details that come out of this:

1) The UM segment shows Mary Gillespie opening the box upon finding it. According to these articles, she did not do that, but turned it over to authorities unopened.

2) Paul Freshour ended up pleading guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, not simply "not guilty." He used an affirmative defense! The UM segment managed to leave out that little detail...

Also, the first of the articles I posted says that Freshour's wife was Mary's sister, not the sister of Mr. [Rick] Gillespie, which is what the UM segment says. I wonder which is right?

Finally, we get the name of the superintendant involved in the affair: Gordon Massie.

The more I think about it, too, the more it seems to me perfectly plausible that a friend, relative, etc. of Freshour's helped him out by continuing to write letters while Freshour was in prison, so that he could plausibly claim that there was more than reasonable doubt that he was the one responsible for the attempted murder, etc. Freshour's use of an affirmative defense at trial really sinks his credibility for me, and is a pretty shameful omission on the part of UM...

Hey Mozart, well, I respect your posts because you are a thinker but I am sort of surprised at you. Remember, Freshour was an inexperienced suspect, this was circa 1982, 1983? Back then, it was much easier to be found not guilty by reason of insanity than it would be now. The laws were changed around the time of Freshour's trial after, John Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity in the attempted murder of President Reagan. There was a large public outcry so the laws were changed to make it harder for a jury to find a person not guilty by reason of insanity. My guess, although that is all it is a guess, is that Freshour's lawyer told him he would have a better chance of acquittal if he pled insanity as opposed to a straight not guilty verdict. Freshour's lawyer, like most defense lawyers probably also advised his client to not take the stand. Freshour being an inexperienced suspect and not seeming to be an assertive man probably took his lawyers advice, because he didnt know any better.

Also Mozart, you assume that UM is wrong and that the articles were right. I can tell you that newspaper writers twist the facts and either intentionally or unintentionally get things wrong. It happens. Now which one got it wrong? I couldnt tell you. However I assume nothing. Maybe UM twisted the facts? But maybe the newspaper did too. I can tell you that Martin Yant is a wonderful private investigator and he wouldnt have taken on this case without doing his research. But who is really right? Remains to be seen.

While your theory is possible, I tend not to agree with it. That is pretty remarkable for you to claim that Freshour either wrote the letters or knew who did and do nothing to stop them. Then you say that after he went to prison he had another writer continue to write the letters for him to throw off the authorities and give the impression that the writer was still on the loose writing the letters. It just seems to me that you are pretty determined to think that Freshour is guilty. A wild theory that is possible but not likely. Now maybe Freshour did do it, but I dont think the evidence was there to convict him.

Hey Mozart, well, I res... same old same

I could swear I read that you "retired". Have a bit of pride and stick to it hey.

Hey! Thanks for the warm welcome! Whether or not I am retired, that has nothing to do with the topic of the Circleville letters.

Hey Mozart, well, I respect your posts because you are a thinker but I am sort of surprised at you. Remember, Freshour was an inexperienced suspect, this was circa 1982, 1983? Back then, it was much easier to be found not guilty by reason of insanity than it would be now. The laws were changed around the time of Freshour's trial after, John Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity in the attempted murder of President Reagan. There was a large public outcry so the laws were changed to make it harder for a jury to find a person not guilty by reason of insanity. My guess, although that is all it is a guess, is that Freshour's lawyer told him he would have a better chance of acquittal if he pled insanity as opposed to a straight not guilty verdict. Freshour's lawyer, like most defense lawyers probably also advised his client to not take the stand. Freshour being an inexperienced suspect and not seeming to be an assertive man probably took his lawyers advice, because he didnt know any better.

Also Mozart, you assume that UM is wrong and that the articles were right. I can tell you that newspaper writers twist the facts and either intentionally or unintentionally get things wrong. It happens. Now which one got it wrong? I couldnt tell you. However I assume nothing. Maybe UM twisted the facts? But maybe the newspaper did too. I can tell you that Martin Yant is a wonderful private investigator and he wouldnt have taken on this case without doing his research. But who is really right? Remains to be seen.

While your theory is possible, I tend not to agree with it. That is pretty remarkable for you to claim that Freshour either wrote the letters or knew who did and do nothing to stop them. Then you say that after he went to prison he had another writer continue to write the letters for him to throw off the authorities and give the impression that the writer was still on the loose writing the letters. It just seems to me that you are pretty determined to think that Freshour is guilty. A wild theory that is possible but not likely. Now maybe Freshour did do it, but I dont think the evidence was there to convict him.

Perhaps it's me, but if I am charged with something but KNOW for a fact I wasn't responsible, there is NO WAY I enter an affirmative defense, even if I think it has a better chance of "working." Because, if it doesn't, it's a lot harder to convince people later you weren't involved --- even if there is good evidence supporting you. This case is a perfect example. The continuation of the letters, even after Freshour's conviction, would normally constititute pretty strong evidence in his favor. Except that, as part of his OWN DEFENSE, he admitted having participated in the whole thing.

Now, is it possible that Freshour had an incompetent attorney and a witness (his ex-wife) lying against him, and figured his best bet might be to "throw himself on the mercy of the court" as it were? Sure, it's possible. But I don't think it's much of a stretch to think he really WAS involved after all, either. And in any event, it was awfully negligent for UM to omit this piece of information.

Anyway, nice to see you back kadrmas.

Thanks for the actual warm welcome Mozart. Well I see where you are coming from. To be honest, I too share your opinion that if there is something that I knew I was responsible for and had nothing to do with, no way would I enter an insanity defense or a guilty plea. I mean, why flush your integrity down the toilet?

Oh no, I dont think it is a stretch to say Freshour was involved. He very well could have been. Clearly for this mysterious letter writer whoever they are, they had some personal feelings for Mary Gillespie. Now in terms of Ron Gillespie's murder, maybe Freshour did it? Maybe the Superintendent of Schools did it? Maybe a third party did it?

Clearly this person knew a lot of intimate details about Mary Gillespie's life to even suspect she was having an affair. So either this person was close to Mary or they were close to the superintendent of schools. Could it be that Paul Freshour had romantic feelings for Mary Gillespie and wanted Ron out of the way? Could it be the Superintendent if he had a wife, that she could have been behind it?

This case is quite murky and a very intriguing mystery. Regardless of Freshour's innocence or guilt there was certainly some shady stuff going on with Sheriff Radcliffe there in Circleville. Good old boy network going on for sure. Do you have any opinions as to any of this stuff Mozart?

Hey! Thanks for the warm welcome! Whether or not I am retired, that has nothing to do with the topic of the Circleville letters.

Hmm..and just what did an attention seeking "retirement" post have to do with Unsolved Mysteries? You can't just do a Costanza and just show up. You posted a crybaby retirement post telling the whole world you've had enough, stick with it!

Honestly, I want to believe Freshour wasn't involved in the case, but the fact that his gun went "missing" and he didn't report it or anything is beyond me. Come on, it's a lethal weapon, how did he have the nerve to just not care and let it go?

I also believe that it was a person close to the Gillespes, like a friend or something. The Sheriff MIGHT of tried the handwriting thing as a way to frame Freshour, as I've never heard of that method being used when comparing handwriting.''

This is definitely one of the most interesting and scary cases on UM, especially with all the questions and controversy surrounding it. Like another poster mentioned, why would Mary have an affair with the superintendent AFTER the letters and the warnings? I highly doubt this will get solved due to the difficulty of deciphering the origins of letters, as there can be imposters and or other suspects.

I believe Freshour was framed, and just judging from the segment, I think he might have suspected Mary Gillispie to be the letter writer. I'll explain this, although it might seem a little speculative.

Clearly, that malarky about the affair beginning after Ron's death lacks even a shred of credibility. Why on God's green earth would Mary and the superintendent begin an affair after years of apparent small-town gossip, speculation, and controversy and her subsequent vehement denial of any of it---especially if she had been getting threatening letters stating that the writer knows that she has children and where she lives? If the affair began before Mr. Gillispie's death, there's a clear motive for his murder. Mary could've easily had someone call the Gillispie residence, provoke Ron, and send him into a furious rush out the door. God only knows how exactly that wreck happened, but I suspect that that may not have been exactly what the caller (or Mary Gillispie) had planned on. I think he was being lured to a further destination, and the wreck was probably caused by a mixture of inebriation (his BAC was one and a half times the legal limit in Ohio) and the proverbial "heat of the moment." I agree with earlier posts about the shot fired; it was probably an accidental discharge.

Paul Freshour was convenient, and that's why he was framed. No one had expressed anything about his possible involvement until he divorced his wife (Ron's sister). Mary, seeking an opportunity, could've easily duped/manipulated Paul's ex-wife into believing Freshour was behind it the entire time, especially during such an emotional time as a divorce. And as all seem to have been fairly close, it would not be surprising that at least one of those women would know where Freshour kept his pistol. It's likely that neither of those women are above the amatuerish attempt to rub off the serial number.

You have Freshour's pistol, you have an ongoing, disturbing phenomenon with threatening letters, and you have a death that may be linked to it. Radcliff wanted someone he could point to. It's not unfeasible that maybe even Radcliff and the superintendent were in cahoots with one another. But Freshour was just too easy to blame, and that's why he got sent.

The letters that came after Paul's imprisonment could be either one of two things: A) Mary and her cohorts sent them to further implicate Paul, taunt him, and/or keep law enforcement confounded, or all of the above, or B) The letters are the work of copycats. This isn't unfeasible as the handwriting in the letters are considerably different. I'm not exactly sure, but I am certain they aren't Freshour's work.

Freshour, during the end of the segment, seems to want to distance himself from the Gillispie family in general. "That's in my past, that's not my family anymore." He does express a desire to know who Ron's killer is (if anyone but Ron himself), but he does not speak in a particularly warm manner about his "past" and the "family" he was once part of. I don't know what it is about his tone, but I suspect there's something more there than what appeared on that segment. Maybe I'm being overly speculative, but everytime I see that segment, something always seems funny to me about that portion of the interview.


I'm unsure. It's one of the most confusing, brain-racking cases ever shown on UM, and that's probably why it's so damn frightening.


You el sickos will pay! :crazy:

I just watched this segment again, and I believe that there is more than one letter writer. There just has to be! At one point, hundreds of letters were being circulated every day. Who has the time and the patience to write out hundreds of letters (some of which are very long) every day?

Check the handwriting on the first letter received by Mrs. Gillespie, and compare it to the handwriting on some of the rest of the letters. The handwriting is somewhat different.

This theory could be pretty silly, and there could be a perfectly reasonable explanation for all of it, but all of this just bothers me.

This next to the Adam Bright case are the two most complex mysteries that UM has ever put on.

I agree that looking at the letters there is a pyschopathic nature to some of them. Especially the later ones. I do concur with the possibility of a copycat writer. The writer reminds me eerily of Zodiac in his tone.

Everything about this case seems less like a crime of passion and more like the act of a psychopath. I'm not sure a jilted lover would go through this much trouble just to off someone and/or frame somebody.

That crude booby trap is the thing that interests me the most. It was pretty obvious that the purpose of it was to frame Paul.If it actually killed her that would have been just gravy for the writer. It takes a pretty devious and demented mind to come up with that booby trap on her bus route. I'm just not sure that Freshour has that makeup.

I wonder if this case was simple blackmail attempt that got out of control by the writer. Maybe when the writer did not get the money, it evolved into a vindictive game on all parties involved.

This next to the Adam Bright case are the two most complex mysteries that UM has ever put on.

I agree that looking at the letters there is a pyschopathic nature to some of them. Especially the later ones. I do concur with the possibility of a copycat writer. The writer reminds me eerily of Zodiac in his tone.

Everything about this case seems less like a crime of passion and more like the act of a psychopath. I'm not sure a jilted lover would go through this much trouble just to off someone and/or frame somebody.

That crude booby trap is the thing that interests me the most. It was pretty obvious that the purpose of it was to frame Paul.If it actually killed her that would have been just gravy for the writer. It takes a pretty devious and demented mind to come up with that booby trap on her bus route. I'm just not sure that Freshour has that makeup.

I wonder if this case was simple blackmail attempt that got out of control by the writer. Maybe when the writer did not get the money, it evolved into a vindictive game on all parties involved.


The booby trap is the eeriest aspect of the entire case. That's clearly not the work of any normal, mentally healthy individual.

The booby trap is the eeriest aspect of the entire case. That's clearly not the work of any normal, mentally healthy individual.

You're right. That's the kind of guy that likes to make el sickos pay!:lol:

This next to the Adam Bright case are the two most complex mysteries that UM has ever put on.

I agree that looking at the letters there is a pyschopathic nature to some of them. Especially the later ones. I do concur with the possibility of a copycat writer. The writer reminds me eerily of Zodiac in his tone.

Everything about this case seems less like a crime of passion and more like the act of a psychopath. I'm not sure a jilted lover would go through this much trouble just to off someone and/or frame somebody.

That crude booby trap is the thing that interests me the most. It was pretty obvious that the purpose of it was to frame Paul.If it actually killed her that would have been just gravy for the writer. It takes a pretty devious and demented mind to come up with that booby trap on her bus route. I'm just not sure that Freshour has that makeup.

I wonder if this case was simple blackmail attempt that got out of control by the writer. Maybe when the writer did not get the money, it evolved into a vindictive game on all parties involved.
do you mean Jeremy Bright? I have no clue who Adam Bright was/is.

Jeremy Bright was perplexing too.

but i was actually referring to Blair Adams, the Canadian man who was found murdered with his pants down in Kentucky(?). My apologies.

Jeremy Bright was perplexing too.

but i was actually referring to Blair Adams, the Canadian man who was found murdered with his pants down in Kentucky(?). My apologies.

Blair Adams was found in my hometown, Knoxville, TN. Strangely enough, I don't remember the case being prominent in the local news. Nor is it featured on the Knox County Sherriff's website under the "Cold Case" section:

http://www.knoxsheriff.org/content/category/7/21/44/



Thought that was rather strange. That segment gives me chills similar to the Leppert case, only in a creepier way as I live about seven or eight miles away from the gas station and hotel he was last seen.





As an aside, J.J. Jones, the head detective on that case seen on the segment, is now our county sheriff.

Well, isnt the reason the Blair Adams case wouldnt be in the 'cold case' section, isnt that because the cops almost seemed to think that he killed himself? I thought somewhere, either the coroner or the cops or somebody thought it was suicide or accidental? It did seem that J.J. Jones was just up in the air about this. He didnt know what to think and I dont blame him. He said sometimes he thinks it was murder, other times he thinks it was an accident, he said there was just really no logic or explaination for anything Blair Adams did so it was really hard to determine exactly what happened.

Well, isnt the reason the Blair Adams case wouldnt be in the 'cold case' section, isnt that because the cops almost seemed to think that he killed himself? I thought somewhere, either the coroner or the cops or somebody thought it was suicide or accidental? It did seem that J.J. Jones was just up in the air about this. He didnt know what to think and I dont blame him. He said sometimes he thinks it was murder, other times he thinks it was an accident, he said there was just really no logic or explaination for anything Blair Adams did so it was really hard to determine exactly what happened.

I believe Jones found it to be more inconclusive than anything, but he doesn't sound as though he ruled out murder. In the segment he says he initially believed it was a robbery, but no money was taken from Adams; nearly $4,000 in American and foreign currency lay around him at the scene, as well as a small bag containing jewelery and other valuable items. Jones made mention of the pants being down "not like he took them off himself", but "inside out" as though someone else had done it, and the autopsy report showed multiple signs that Adams had fended off an attack.

I suppose the reason it's not there is the case has been long closed due to lack of evidence. Nonetheless, I find it strange. Some of those cold cases are nearly 30 years old and don't have nearly the amount of evidence the Adams case does.

One of the many things i found creepy about the Blair Adams segment was that they used that same scary music they used in the Cindy James segment.

That music during the security camera where Blair was acting constantly coming in and out still gives me the chills.

That being said i would love to get a mp3 of that music,. :D

Ohhhh I know! I was watching the segment in the dark last night (not a wise move to begin with), and I jumped up really fast and turned on every light in the room when that music started playing. *shudders*

One of many curiosities regarding the Circleville case: Does anyone know, or have some theory of, who the initial armchair suspect was? I'm referring to the person contacted by Mary, Ron, Paul, etc. early on, as they sent letters to the person they believed to be responsible. I assume it wasn't Paul Freshour at that point?

Ok I just have to say this is by far the most BIZARRE case I have ever seen on UM.

Seems to me that the one whom the Gillespie's initially thought was the writer, was in fact the writer...because the letters ceased after they wrote their letter to him/her. And then out of the blue one night, Ron gets a phone call that sends him on a rampage out to his truck and we all know what happened to Ron. It's my opinion that Ron was definitely drunk at this point, I believe he had a BAC of .16, so therefore he was pretty drunk. I'll say the odds of this being just a case of a drunken driver crashing his car far outweigh the odds of him chasing the Circleville Writer and him causing his death somehow. But that still leaves a question...who called Ron, and what was the purpose of the call, and what was said? I think it was the guy who the Gillespie's suspected who called him out and Ron got pissed and wanted to confront him so he took his gun (because he was drunk) and went out. Now after Ron died, Mary admitted the affair with the superintendent, but says that it started only after Ron's death...that's definitely hogwash. Someone knew about the affair, obviously was sending the threatening letters asking for it to stop...but who could it have been?

I suspect there was initially one writer, which turned out more copycat writers when the case became public (probably after Ron's death). I think the man whom was initially suspected by the Gillespie's had something to do with the booby trap aimed at Mary...but what doesn't make sense is how he got the gun. The only thing I can imagine is that either Paul Freshour or his ex-wife were involved/linked with the original Circleville Writer. That's the only way someone could have gotten Paul's gun and made the booby trap. In Paul's interviews he comes off as someone who was honest, and I believe his story...therefore I think his ex-wife was involved in some way. She would have had sour grapes over their divorce and I think she used Paul's gun as a way to set him up as the fall guy. I'm not sure if Mary was involved in the frame job of Paul, but I think she was convinced by her sister once it was revealed that it was Paul's gun. And again, here is another important piece of the story...we only have Mary's word to go on that the booby trap and the sign were there...yes the other bus driver stated she saw a man in an El Camino in the same spot, but who's to say the man was just relieving himself, or perhaps he was setting up the trap for Mary to discover because Mary was in on it as well!

Who's to say that Mary and her sister didn't concoct this little plan to frame Freshour, so what they did was cook up a story, made a booby trap (or had someone make it), and Mary convienently found it but didn't open it and took it to authorities. Who's to say the sign and the box were even up at all? Perhaps she had it with her all along. So in this respect, I think that the original Circleville Writer either stopped writing letters after Ron Gillespie's death (for fear of him being accused of being involved in the murder), and others used the handle of "The Circleville Writer" to spread small town gossip around town, there were possibly over a dozen Circleville writers, and I think Paul Freshour's ex-wife was one of them, or linked to one of them. At least that would seem the most logical here because the letter addressed to Paul Freshour stated something like, "that's what I told you two years ago...", so it was someone Paul knew who wrote the letter to him in prison. This case is definitely creepy on the surface, but I think when you dig deeper all you get is a chance for people to openly express gossip about others in a small town and a way to do it anonymously...

On a side note, I think it's odd that some of the letters (like the one addressed to UM) say something along the lines of leaving Sheriff Radcliffe alone...makes me wonder if it was some authorities were involved in writing letters as well.

The booby trap is the eeriest aspect of the entire case. That's clearly not the work of any normal, mentally healthy individual.

Perhaps that's why Freshour pleaded not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect.

I recently saw this case again on the new UM. It's one of my favorite cases, but I'm puzzled as to some of the lines of inquiry. I don't think I have nearly the same viewpoint on the case as a lot of people here.

First off, and slightly off topic: I think that the new UM actually did a good job in editing this segment. The original segment dragged a bit and this time the editing punched it up rather well. Could have done without the dramatic black-and-white shots, but otherwise a good job.

Secondly: I cannot understand why anyone thinks there was ever just one letter writer. In fact the whole case should be called "The Circleville Letter Writers", in plural. Check out the first few letters, written before Ron Gillispie died, and the later letters. They're totally different. The very first letter has very elongated letters with defined curves, and all of the letters slant to the right. Some of the next letters show letters which are a bit more blocky, but they share a lot of characteristics with the first example: defined curves, and the letters slant to the right.

But the letters that appeared after Ron died don't look like that. Take a look at the postcard shown at the beginning of the segment as an example. The letters are extremely blocky. The letter "O" looks like a square. Most importantly, the letters don't slant to the right; it almost slants left. Most people's handwriting consistently slants to one direction or the other, and it's very hard for someone to change directions.

What's going on here? It looks to me like the person who wrote the first letter was trying very hard to disguise his or her handwriting. You can see that the letter was written on ruled paper. It's possible that this person used a stencil or similar device as a guide. The lack of numbers or symbols in the first letter (and subsequent letters) points to use of a stencil as well; perhaps the stencil didn't have them. The next few letters are a bit shakier. They weren't written on ruled paper, but it's likely the writer tried to emulate what he or she did with the first letter. Naturally the letter-writer continued to slant his or her writing to the right. After Ron died and the letters started again, it looks like someone was trying to imitate some of the later letters by making the letters blockier...but they did too good of a job of it. That person also couldn't help but slant their writing slightly to the left.

If we accept that there is more than one letter writer, that punches a big hole in Paul Freshour's argument that he couldn't have written any of the letters. The letters written when he was in prison don't look like the letters which were written when he was out.

Thirdly: Paul Freshour had the world's worst lawyer. Even in 1983 anybody would have known that pleading not guilty by reason of insanity was a bad idea. I mean, look where it's got John Hinckley: still in a mental facility, no chance of ever getting out. If Freshour had pled down to attempted manslaughter or a lower charge, he might have spent less than a year in jail, or even got probation only. Instead he spent over ten years in jail, some of it in solitary. Even if he'd "won" he would have been spending serious time in a mental facility (NOT a fun place to be). Bad, bad gamble.

Fourthly: I think the person who was sent the return letter from the Gillispie clan was not the original letter-writer. Put yourself in that person's shoes. You're sending anonymous letters in a campaign of terror. Now that person sends you a letter back, claiming that your cover's blown. Do you stop sending letters? Hell naw. You don't want to admit they're on to you. You just keep sending letters as if nothing's happened. Stopping the letter campaign is about the worst thing you can do.

Now what if you're the letter-writer and you hear somebody else got a strange letter accusing them of the campaign? Well, by all means you stop writing. Let them think it was the other guy. I've seen this happen on a lot of anonymous message boards (you know a modern Circleville letter writer would do that).

I suppose there's an outside chance that if this were a two-person job and person #1 got a letter, person #2 might shut down the operation. That too is a possibility.

More to follow tonight after I get done with my two jobs for the day.

Has anyone ever thought that Mrs. Gillespie could have been writing the letters herself? It is very coincidental that she found the booby trap that was placed off of the road in the bushes, and that she had already received letter prior to her husband getting one. Also being a one time in-law of Paul Freshour, she most likely had access (at one point or another) to his gun or the house the house that it was kept in.

I could see that she possibly could have had it out for Paul Freshour, and maybe even got her husband drunk and in a rage after telling him that Paul Freshour was the writer, sending him out with his gun to kill him.

Just an idea I had after watching the segment.

Has anyone ever thought that Mrs. Gillespie could have been writing the letters herself? It is very coincidental that she found the booby trap that was placed off of the road in the bushes, and that she had already received letter prior to her husband getting one.

It's an interesting theory, but I doubt it myself. It's not surprising she got first sight of the letters because (1) the first one was addressed to her and (2) since she worked as a bus driver she would probably have been home before her husband.

As for the booby trap...well, I'm still very suspicious of the whole set-up myself, but I think there is another explanation for that.

A quick note on the current status of the players in this case: Gordon Massie, the superintendent whose alleged affair with Mary Gillispie started the whole thing, is no longer with us. Mary herself is re-married to someone else, and now lives under another name. Paul Freshour got out of jail in 1994 and lived in Florida for a time.

I agree that there had to be more than one Circleville writer. I just think people started getting on the bandwagon and using the guise of the Circleville writer as a way to spread gossip about their neighbors and do it anonymously.

I wish "American Justice" or "City Confidential" had done a segment on the Circleville Letters segment. I am sure there are A LOT of other stories and people involved but I just don't think Paul Freshour was involved.

More people probably know what was going but were/are afraid to talk.

I wish "American Justice" or "City Confidential" had done a segment on the Circleville Letters segment. I am sure there are A LOT of other stories and people involved but I just don't think Paul Freshour was involved.

More people probably know what was going but were/are afraid to talk.

Me too. This is always one of those cases that I hope something will pop up on the internet about some day, but I can never find a thing. And what a great topic for a City Confidential episode! Circleville was dead asleep the last time I passed through there....I'm sure it wouldn't hurt! (and yeah, y'all, I actually got up the courage to go since my husband moved up to Ohio for work. They sure like their pumpkins!)

I agree with the OP the SIL could have been the culprit.

I recently saw this case again on the new UM. It's one of my favorite cases, but I'm puzzled as to some of the lines of inquiry. I don't think I have nearly the same viewpoint on the case as a lot of people here.

First off, and slightly off topic: I think that the new UM actually did a good job in editing this segment. The original segment dragged a bit and this time the editing punched it up rather well. Could have done without the dramatic black-and-white shots, but otherwise a good job.

Secondly: I cannot understand why anyone thinks there was ever just one letter writer. In fact the whole case should be called "The Circleville Letter Writers", in plural. Check out the first few letters, written before Ron Gillispie died, and the later letters. They're totally different. The very first letter has very elongated letters with defined curves, and all of the letters slant to the right. Some of the next letters show letters which are a bit more blocky, but they share a lot of characteristics with the first example: defined curves, and the letters slant to the right.

But the letters that appeared after Ron died don't look like that. Take a look at the postcard shown at the beginning of the segment as an example. The letters are extremely blocky. The letter "O" looks like a square. Most importantly, the letters don't slant to the right; it almost slants left. Most people's handwriting consistently slants to one direction or the other, and it's very hard for someone to change directions.

What's going on here? It looks to me like the person who wrote the first letter was trying very hard to disguise his or her handwriting. You can see that the letter was written on ruled paper. It's possible that this person used a stencil or similar device as a guide. The lack of numbers or symbols in the first letter (and subsequent letters) points to use of a stencil as well; perhaps the stencil didn't have them. The next few letters are a bit shakier. They weren't written on ruled paper, but it's likely the writer tried to emulate what he or she did with the first letter. Naturally the letter-writer continued to slant his or her writing to the right. After Ron died and the letters started again, it looks like someone was trying to imitate some of the later letters by making the letters blockier...but they did too good of a job of it. That person also couldn't help but slant their writing slightly to the left.

If we accept that there is more than one letter writer, that punches a big hole in Paul Freshour's argument that he couldn't have written any of the letters. The letters written when he was in prison don't look like the letters which were written when he was out.

Thirdly: Paul Freshour had the world's worst lawyer. Even in 1983 anybody would have known that pleading not guilty by reason of insanity was a bad idea. I mean, look where it's got John Hinckley: still in a mental facility, no chance of ever getting out. If Freshour had pled down to attempted manslaughter or a lower charge, he might have spent less than a year in jail, or even got probation only. Instead he spent over ten years in jail, some of it in solitary. Even if he'd "won" he would have been spending serious time in a mental facility (NOT a fun place to be). Bad, bad gamble.

Fourthly: I think the person who was sent the return letter from the Gillispie clan was not the original letter-writer. Put yourself in that person's shoes. You're sending anonymous letters in a campaign of terror. Now that person sends you a letter back, claiming that your cover's blown. Do you stop sending letters? Hell naw. You don't want to admit they're on to you. You just keep sending letters as if nothing's happened. Stopping the letter campaign is about the worst thing you can do.

Now what if you're the letter-writer and you hear somebody else got a strange letter accusing them of the campaign? Well, by all means you stop writing. Let them think it was the other guy. I've seen this happen on a lot of anonymous message boards (you know a modern Circleville letter writer would do that).

I suppose there's an outside chance that if this were a two-person job and person #1 got a letter, person #2 might shut down the operation. That too is a possibility.

More to follow tonight after I get done with my two jobs for the day.

Come back, The Third Man (good flick by the way)! I was enjoying this post, and wanted to see where you were going with it.

To me the thing that makes this case complex is three things

1. The motive of the writer is difficult to understand. Is the writer a morally concerned gossip hound/jilted lover/prankster/red herring/ or most horrifying of all a psychopath that just chose his target for no apparent reason other than he could. You could make a case for all motives being likely.

2. Has the writer actually commited murder? Is the writer the one that did the murder and/or the booby trap? Was it not a murder or simply an accident? The fact that there was a bullet fired from the gun, seems to go the assumption is that he indeed did confront the writer or the person he suspected of being the writer. Did the letter writer indeed set a booby trap for the purpose of murder or implicating Paul Freshour? and in either case why? And assuming those letters aren;t copycat writings why taunt the guys and

3. How many people are actually involved in this case? Is there some small level conspiracy involved here? is the sheriffs department involved? Is the Freshousr family involved in this case? and if so why? How many writers are there? If there are more than one, Are the writers connected?

There is no simple solution to this case. :confused:

I just have a feeling that there is a whole level to this case that were not privy to, like with the Cindy Anderson case.

I have a feeling that the solution to this case will prove to be more bizarre than we ever imagined.


Question"

Didn;t the writer make at least one phone call? Was the decease the only oned ton hear the writers voice?

I recently saw this case again on the new UM. It's one of my favorite cases, but I'm puzzled as to some of the lines of inquiry. I don't think I have nearly the same viewpoint on the case as a lot of people here.

First off, and slightly off topic: I think that the new UM actually did a good job in editing this segment. The original segment dragged a bit and this time the editing punched it up rather well. Could have done without the dramatic black-and-white shots, but otherwise a good job.

Secondly: I cannot understand why anyone thinks there was ever just one letter writer. In fact the whole case should be called "The Circleville Letter Writers", in plural. Check out the first few letters, written before Ron Gillispie died, and the later letters. They're totally different. The very first letter has very elongated letters with defined curves, and all of the letters slant to the right. Some of the next letters show letters which are a bit more blocky, but they share a lot of characteristics with the first example: defined curves, and the letters slant to the right.

But the letters that appeared after Ron died don't look like that. Take a look at the postcard shown at the beginning of the segment as an example. The letters are extremely blocky. The letter "O" looks like a square. Most importantly, the letters don't slant to the right; it almost slants left. Most people's handwriting consistently slants to one direction or the other, and it's very hard for someone to change directions.

What's going on here? It looks to me like the person who wrote the first letter was trying very hard to disguise his or her handwriting. You can see that the letter was written on ruled paper. It's possible that this person used a stencil or similar device as a guide. The lack of numbers or symbols in the first letter (and subsequent letters) points to use of a stencil as well; perhaps the stencil didn't have them. The next few letters are a bit shakier. They weren't written on ruled paper, but it's likely the writer tried to emulate what he or she did with the first letter. Naturally the letter-writer continued to slant his or her writing to the right. After Ron died and the letters started again, it looks like someone was trying to imitate some of the later letters by making the letters blockier...but they did too good of a job of it. That person also couldn't help but slant their writing slightly to the left.

If we accept that there is more than one letter writer, that punches a big hole in Paul Freshour's argument that he couldn't have written any of the letters. The letters written when he was in prison don't look like the letters which were written when he was out.

Thirdly: Paul Freshour had the world's worst lawyer. Even in 1983 anybody would have known that pleading not guilty by reason of insanity was a bad idea. I mean, look where it's got John Hinckley: still in a mental facility, no chance of ever getting out. If Freshour had pled down to attempted manslaughter or a lower charge, he might have spent less than a year in jail, or even got probation only. Instead he spent over ten years in jail, some of it in solitary. Even if he'd "won" he would have been spending serious time in a mental facility (NOT a fun place to be). Bad, bad gamble.

Fourthly: I think the person who was sent the return letter from the Gillispie clan was not the original letter-writer. Put yourself in that person's shoes. You're sending anonymous letters in a campaign of terror. Now that person sends you a letter back, claiming that your cover's blown. Do you stop sending letters? Hell naw. You don't want to admit they're on to you. You just keep sending letters as if nothing's happened. Stopping the letter campaign is about the worst thing you can do.

Now what if you're the letter-writer and you hear somebody else got a strange letter accusing them of the campaign? Well, by all means you stop writing. Let them think it was the other guy. I've seen this happen on a lot of anonymous message boards (you know a modern Circleville letter writer would do that).

I suppose there's an outside chance that if this were a two-person job and person #1 got a letter, person #2 might shut down the operation. That too is a possibility.

More to follow tonight after I get done with my two jobs for the day..

Come back, The Third Man (good flick by the way)! I was enjoying this post, and wanted to see where you were going with it.

Well WTH is this all about? The Third Man can anylize, speculate, offer alternate theories, and Mozart praises him to high heaven. But when I offer a similar post, I'm critized and judged.

Consistency, thou art a jewel. (yeah, that's a <snark>)

Well WTH is this all about? The Third Man can anylize, speculate, offer alternate theories, and Mozart praises him to high heaven. But when I offer a similar post, I'm critized and judged.

Consistency, thou art a jewel. (yeah, that's a <snark>)

TracyLynnS, the difference between what The Third Man was offering and what you offered is that his goes towards proposing a new theory of the case - a solution of sorts. Yours was nitpicking at the details of a composite sketch, even though it's clear that the composite sketch, in a general way, resembles a person of interest in the case. Since the point of a composite sketch is to give a general idea of what a person of interest looks like (and thus lead to people who resemble the sketch and about whom other information is known that would tend to make them possible suspects), your analysis - while accurate enough in its own way - seemed to me to be a whole lot of effort towards precious little return. I wasn't picking on you personally. I was just stunned that someone would ignore the obvious - the sketch basically looks like the guy who is being investigated as a suspect, and thus has served its purpose with respect to the suspect in question - to perform instead minute analysis as to why the sketch isn't a perfectly detailed rendering of the suspect's face.

I was just stunned that someone would ignore the obvious - the sketch basically looks like the guy who is being investigated as a suspect, and thus has served its purpose with respect to the suspect in question - to perform instead minute analysis as to why the sketch isn't a perfectly detailed rendering of the suspect's face.

Ignore the obvious? Did you read my post at all? I never performed a minute analysis as to why the sketch isn't a perfectly detailed match to the suspect. The whole thing was about how similar I thought the sketch was to the perp, and that Molly's family thought the sketch looked like Stanger.

One of the main reasons I made that post was to point out the many features of the artist's rendering that resembled Stanger, and how, that even after 10 years of aging, similarities could still be seen.

I mentioned many similarities between the sketch and Stanger and commented on only two differences, and I even gave a reasonable explaination of how those two differences could be different from the sketch due to the passage of time.

My entire post was about how it was very possible that the sketch was Stanger. You are plainly saying that I ignored the "obvious" fact that the sketch looks similar to the perp and that I picked apart every detail of the sketch to convince people that it could not possibly be Stanger. I never said anything remotely like that.

This is just beyond ridiculous. You are imagining things and then criticizing me about things I never said. You're implying that I should hold my posted opinions to a professional law enforcement standard, and that if I don't, I'm wasting my time and everyone else's in this forum. I thought we were here to enjoy discussing the subjects on UM. I didn't realize that this board was reserved for professionals with an 8 year degree in criminal forensics.

What is your problem with me? All the other members are permitted to write long, detailed posts filled with speculation and opinion and you're thrilled with their brilliance on the the subject. I certainly don't expect any praise, but to be called out and critized about something I never did is absurd, and I don't appreciate you accusing me of doing something that I didn't do.

I thought she was pointing out the similarities of the 2 unless I have missed something??? When I looked at the composite sketch & the pic I could see right away that the 2 could very well be the same man. I don't see what is the big deal over her post unless I didn't read something correctly.

Does anyone know which UM Boxed set the Circleville Letters episode is on? This one has always been a puzzler and I can't find it on YouTube, and even if I did find it I bet Cosgrove/Meurer has pulled it due to copyright laws.

Oh those pesky copyright laws.

Does anyone know which UM Boxed set the Circleville Letters episode is on? This one has always been a puzzler and I can't find it on YouTube, and even if I did find it I bet Cosgrove/Meurer has pulled it due to copyright laws.

Oh those pesky copyright laws.

it's not on any of the box sets.

it's not on any of the box sets.

WHAAAT? That has to be one of the best segments ever. And not on the boxed sets?

Oh wiseguy182 with Bob Bean on your avatar....that is such sad news!

Oh wiseguy182 with Bob Bean on your avatar....that is such sad news!

how on Earth can you not like Bob Bean? :lol:

Why didn't the cops follow up on the guy in the yellow car, whom the bus driver witnessed rigging the booby-trap?

Why didn't the cops follow up on the guy in the yellow car, whom the bus driver witnessed rigging the booby-trap? One of the many questions I have about this case.

how on Earth can you not like Bob Bean? He brought the definition of smug to a whole new level, no?

Does anyone know which UM Boxed set the Circleville Letters episode is on? This one has always been a puzzler and I can't find it on YouTube, and even if I did find it I bet Cosgrove/Meurer has pulled it due to copyright laws.

Oh those pesky copyright laws.

I don't know a darn thing about copyright laws, but didn't Cosgrove/Meurer sell their rights to Spike TV? Or is it some kind of conditional deal between C/M and Spike, so C/M can continue to sell the DVDs while Spike airs the shows? I was just wondering why C/M enforcing the copyright instead of the people at Spike?

Why didn't the cops follow up on the guy in the yellow car, whom the bus driver witnessed rigging the booby-trap?

Not really much to go on, from what i've heard. Not like there was a license plate or positive make on the car. All they know is that that guys couldn't have been Paul Freshour.

Keep in mind that much like the Thomas Gibson case, it's possible the bus driver could have been asked to lie about the situation.

But they said that a relative of the family drove the same make, model and color of the yellow car seen at the booby trap.

I don't know a darn thing about copyright laws, but didn't Cosgrove/Meurer sell their rights to Spike TV? Or is it some kind of conditional deal between C/M and Spike, so C/M can continue to sell the DVDs while Spike airs the shows? I was just wondering why C/M enforcing the copyright instead of the people at Spike?

Well, I would think that Cosgrove/Meurer still owns the rights ultimately and is "leasing" the television broadcast rights to Spike and the DVD rights to First Look. So it would make sense that CM would be behind any enforcement since they own the show. Also, keep in mind that Cosgrove equals Disney. The Mouse is VERY litigious.

Everytime I watch this segment it seems like I pick/up something ovious, thats never mentioned on the show, or poss in the boards before.....Funnything about a hour after this segment aired yest I filpped to Bio Channel and the Zodiac Killer cold case show aired.....Interestingly the Police/FBI did DNA tests on the letters from Mr Z, I wonder if anyone bothered doing DNA tests on the Circleville luney....considering they should have say A FEW THOUSAND of them to get samples from. Second thought, did the police ever bother to trace the phone call the night that Frashour's brother in law died ? I would think that would have been a no brainer !


PS - Can anyone tell me if UM did an update on the Buffalo Bike-Path Rapist, they mentioned it on the website, I havnt seen a new episode on spike withe the story or update ?

Everytime I watch this segment it seems like I pick/up something ovious, thats never mentioned on the show, or poss in the boards before.....Funnything about a hour after this segment aired yest I filpped to Bio Channel and the Zodiac Killer cold case show aired.....Interestingly the Police/FBI did DNA tests on the letters from Mr Z, I wonder if anyone bothered doing DNA tests on the Circleville luney....considering they should have say A FEW THOUSAND of them to get samples from. Second thought, did the police ever bother to trace the phone call the night that Frashour's brother in law died ? I would think that would have been a no brainer !

I am not sure on whether their is testable DNA on the letter. Maybe someone else knows.

Keep in mind that the C writer wrote his laters in a later period than Z. The C writer may have had the forsight to wear gloves while writing his letters and not licking the envolpes. Something that Z way back in the 70s would never have thought of.

In regards to the phone call, i believe the call was from a pay phone. Not 100% positive on that.

Interesting you should bring up the Zodiac. There was a theory present that the Circleville Writer and Z may have been one and the same. Theres been no substance to that theory, But it did lead to an interesting thought.:

I have often wondered if the Circleville Writer was inspired by the Zodiac. That he saw how much fear and terror the Zodiac caused and figured he could do the same to a small town like circleville.

The age would be about right for the C writer to have been a child riding those school buses during Z's terror campaign. Perhaps now living as an adult in Circleville, OH.

I find it interesting that the woman he chooses to target happens to be a school bus driver.

I wonder if the Circleville writer had a fantasy while riding those buses in San Francisco as a child. Perhaps his memories of this time and some crush on a female bus driver, morphed into a bizarre fantasy that became the Circleville Letters.

I wonder if the Circleville writer had a fantasy while riding those buses in San Francisco as a child. Perhaps his memories of this time and some crush on a female bus driver, morphed into a bizarre fantasy that became the Circleville Letters.[/QUOTE]

Funny you should mention that. In the original movie -Dirty Harry -1971- I believe the killer was loosly based on the Zodiac killer...If I'm not mistaken when Dirty Harry catches the killer just he got done terrorizing school kids on a school bus. Just some food for thought.

Everytime I watch this segment it seems like I pick/up something ovious, thats never mentioned on the show, or poss in the boards before.....Funnything about a hour after this segment aired yest I filpped to Bio Channel and the Zodiac Killer cold case show aired.....Interestingly the Police/FBI did DNA tests on the letters from Mr Z, I wonder if anyone bothered doing DNA tests on the Circleville luney....considering they should have say A FEW THOUSAND of them to get samples from. Second thought, did the police ever bother to trace the phone call the night that Frashour's brother in law died ? I would think that would have been a no brainer !


PS - Can anyone tell me if UM did an update on the Buffalo Bike-Path Rapist, they mentioned it on the website, I havnt seen a new episode on spike withe the story or update ?

Strange you should ask this. It was on UM this morning so I looked it up.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/14/AR2007081400904.html?tid=informbox

An innocent man, Anthony Capozzi, spent 22 years in prison for two of the rapes. He was exonerated when Sanchez's DNA was matched to the crimes Capozzi was convicted of.

Can someone who owns the DVD collection confirm or deny that the Circleville Letters are on any of the DVD's you can purchase? If so, which one? I would assume Bizzare Murders.

Can someone who owns the DVD collection confirm or deny that the Circleville Letters are on any of the DVD's you can purchase? If so, which one? I would assume Bizzare Murders.

It appears that you didn't believe me the first time, so I'll say it again: it's not on any of the box sets. I own all 7 of them, so I ought to know.

It appears that you didn't believe me the first time, so I'll say it again: it's not on any of the box sets. I own all 7 of them, so I ought to know.
Oh wiseguy - please don't think I was trolling for a "better answer." I forgot that I had already asked. I have been having quite the full week - can you tell? And the fact that it appears that Spike is playing games with UM and their schedule is not helping. Poor UM - first NBC and CBS showed it no love, now this.

I just can't believe that they did not put one of the most interesting stories out on the DVD's! I wonder why.......

Wiseguy, do you recommend buyihng the box sets? There is, on Amazon, a "Best of" boxed set but it is not as large.

Wiseguy, do you recommend buyihng the box sets? There is, on Amazon, a "Best of" boxed set but it is not as large.

i don't regret buying them. As to 'would I recommend them?', that would depend on everyone's individual tastes.

the ghosts, miracles, psychics and UFOs sets contain most of the segments in their respective genres. Not all, but most. So if you go for that sort of thing, it's a pretty safe bet you would enjoy it. Strange legends covers a pretty wide swath of its respective field, but there are some glaring omissions. there is a picture of the Pyramids on the cover, but no story in the set.

The bizarre murders focuses mostly on the newer segments, which I don't like as much and which the majority of other posters don't like as much. There are a few older cases peppered in (boys on the tracks, the guy that was thrown into a vat of uranium, Cindy James).

the best of set is a a few cases from each of the aforementioned sets, with a few new cases peppered in. Plus a bonus disc of a few more ghost segments and some treasure segments.

I received a monthly women's magazine in the mail today and on one page there are tips fromn readers. One tip was from a reader from Circleville, Ohio! I got all excited and wondered, "I wonder what they know about the letters?"

Yes my name is VikingGal and I have a problem.

I received a monthly women's magazine in the mail today and on one page there are tips fromn readers. One tip was from a reader from Circleville, Ohio! I got all excited and wondered, "I wonder what they know about the letters?"

Yes my name is VikingGal and I have a problem.

HA:D

On a serious note, maybe it is the writer.

1. It's been intimated that the writer was a woman.

2. Someone who writes letters to that compulsive degree does fit in line with a person who would write to letters columns, talk shows and news editorials. I have often wondered if the Circleville Writer started as writer to a newspaper letters page. Perhaps someone who wrote an inflammatory letter regarding moral values in Circleville, OH. Somewhere I think someone has a letter similar to the Circleville writers.

3. circlevilles not that big a town, and more than likely the writer is indeed form Circleville to know details about Mary Gillespie.

Just random speculation, here. Don't go calling the the UM hotline with the readers name as the Circleville writer!!! LOL!!!:lol:

Does anyone know of a site where you can see samples of the Circleville Letters?

The UM site has the infamous "el sickos" note posted.

http://www.unsolved.com/ajaxfiles/mur_poison_pen_murder.htm

I really wish it was somehow possible to have access to many of the documents in UM segments--the Circleville letters, Richard Bocklage's crazy correspondence to the Kopric family, Ed Baker's "if you are reading this I am dead" note, all the Nyleen Kay Marshall letters (or maybe not :( ). I know it certainly isn't possible, but I wonder how they would change the way we look at these cases, if at all.

I am not sure on whether their is testable DNA on the letter. Maybe someone else knows.

Keep in mind that the C writer wrote his laters in a later period than Z. The C writer may have had the forsight to wear gloves while writing his letters and not licking the envolpes. Something that Z way back in the 70s would never have thought of.

In regards to the phone call, i believe the call was from a pay phone. Not 100% positive on that.

Interesting you should bring up the Zodiac. There was a theory present that the Circleville Writer and Z may have been one and the same. Theres been no substance to that theory, But it did lead to an interesting thought.:

I have often wondered if the Circleville Writer was inspired by the Zodiac. That he saw how much fear and terror the Zodiac caused and figured he could do the same to a small town like circleville.

The age would be about right for the C writer to have been a child riding those school buses during Z's terror campaign. Perhaps now living as an adult in Circleville, OH.

I find it interesting that the woman he chooses to target happens to be a school bus driver.

I wonder if the Circleville writer had a fantasy while riding those buses in San Francisco as a child. Perhaps his memories of this time and some crush on a female bus driver, morphed into a bizarre fantasy that became the Circleville Letters.

I dont believe the Circleville writer was Zodiac. Maybe they got the idea for the writing from Zodiac,but thats about it,in my opinion.

If you are interested in a possible Zodiac connection to Ohio,and the Circleville writer,you may find this guy interesting. I dont think he was Zodiac,but some people think he could have been.

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/47/who-was-joe-chandler

Wish i could view some good quality pics of the letters,anyone know of any?

Wish i could view some good quality pics of the letters,anyone know of any?

No dice. You'd think unsolved.com would post a couple so some viewer might recognize the handwriting.:rolleyes:

I agree that Mary looks like the culprit, and it reminds me of the Cindy James case, where someone was perpetrating their own suffering. Mary seemed to be getting most of the letters, and was finding the signs along her bus route, and was the one who was shot, but not in any way that caused serious injury. I don't know, it seems very weird.

I agree that Mary looks like the culprit, and it reminds me of the Cindy James case, where someone was perpetrating their own suffering. Mary seemed to be getting most of the letters, and was finding the signs along her bus route, and was the one who was shot, but not in any way that caused serious injury. I don't know, it seems very weird.

But Mary's husband ended up getting killed, would she kill her own husband?

I agree that Mary looks like the culprit, and it reminds me of the Cindy James case, where someone was perpetrating their own suffering. Mary seemed to be getting most of the letters, and was finding the signs along her bus route, and was the one who was shot, but not in any way that caused serious injury. I don't know, it seems very weird.

Why go through all this trouble to get rid of Paul Freshour? I can think of a million ways that she could have accomplished that. I mean there was so much that could go wrong in a convoluted plan like this? Why would she expose her own infidelity in those letters? Why would her own husband not recogniz her handwriting? Plus her husband seemed to have an idea who it was and it was someone other than Mary? The fact that he brought a gun insinuates that he thought the writer was a man.

and it reminds me of the Cindy James case,

This case is radically different from Cindy James.

1. The harassment and letter writing campaign was not precluded to one person. Letters were writing to several different people as well as phone calls made to several different people

2. We potentially have two different attacks on two different people. The death of Mary's husband and the booby trap on Mary herself.

3. The Circleville Letters were indeed mailed out to people.

4. Cindy James "stalker" never made his demands clear. The Circleville Writer made his claims very clear. He wanted Mary Gillespie to end her affair.

5. There's a buildup and slow down in the writers activities. First he starts with the warning letter. When his demands aren't met he starts sending letters to more people. When his demands still aren't met he starts calling her home directly. When her husband decides to go out after him. The calling campaign stops and he goes back to letters. Even sending one to the Sherrif. implicating him in a coverup. He then does the booby trap with Paul's gun. When Paul is in jail the letters subside. But once in jail, he writes letters to him.

5. Cindy James died at the end of her ordeal (most likely by suicide) The only person that died in this ordeal was Mary's husband, just as he was about to confront whom he believed was the writer.

mastermind,

i am with you on this. i think they all know who the writer is. i mean mary's husband had to ahve told others who he thought the writer was.

I'd give anything to know what was said in that phone conversation. I totally and have always agreed with the notion that all parties knew who the writer was, as well.

I'd give anything to know what was said in that phone conversation. I totally and have always agreed with the notion that all parties knew who the writer was, as well.

One theory I've had is the possibility that the writer may be a member of law enforcement. It would explain why the other members of the family are hesitant to reveal his identity. It would also explain how he could have gotten away with Mary's husband and how he got Paul Freshours gun. Also would explain why he wrote to the sheriff after Mary's husbands death.

i'm not sure if it was in the family. but there is a good chance that the writer was in law enforcement.

the husband bringing a gun to confront the person and as well as the shady events regarding his death and the brother in law's conviction....could point towards some law enforcement doings.

wow mastermind....we posted around exactly same time...same thoughts exactly!

wow mastermind....we posted around exactly same time...same thoughts exactly!

Someone call Spike TV! We just had a pyschic incident! This should !:D

he husband bringing a gun to confront the person and as well as the shady events regarding his death and the brother in law's conviction....could point towards some law enforcement doings.

The writer did say in a letter that he would shout out Mary's infidelity on CBs and radios. Unless he's a truck driver or ham radio operator.. I wonder where he would get access to a CB radio.....

Another possibility is that the writer could be another bus driver.

My theory on the Circleville Letters:

I believe that the original writer of the letters was a disgruntled member of the school system. A person that was long tenured there and knew the subject of his/her letters. There are several reasons I believe the culprit had to be working for the schools:

His Vendetta against Superintendent Gordon Massie. In the first few letters, the writer implored Mary to come forward and report the affair to the board of education. This was well before he sent a letter directly to her husband Robert. He wanted to hurt Massie's reputation and get him fired from his position first and foremost. In some of the letters the writer suggests he was mistreated by the school.

Almost everyone he wrote about was involved with the school. The subject of most of his letters was someone involved in the school. Gordon Massie and Mary Gillispie. Also there were several letters accusing Judge Roger Kline of impregnating former teacher Vicki Koch and murdering her.

Now onto Ron Gillespie, who killed him? This one baffles me. He was well over the legal limit of BAC when he was driving, and was in a rage when he left the house. So it is not inconceivable that his death truly was an accident. But the coincidences are strong. The letters threatened Ron's life, and directly after he gets a phone call and goes to confront who he thinks it is, he dies. And what about the fired shot from his gun? The gun possibly could have went off on it's own from the force of the collision. Or he could have fired it at someone. Perhaps he confronted who he suspected and the suspect fleed, with Ron in pursuit firing a round from his gun then losing control? Or maybe the whole thing was a trap and the man forced Ron off the road with Ron getting a shot off before crashing.

As for who set up the booby trap that Mary found? I truly believe that Karen Freshour (Paul's ex-wife and Ron's sister) is responsible for that. Here is why I believe this:

Means: She had access to Paul's gun which was used in the trap and knew where it was. The black and yellow El Camino which was spotted by another driver right before Mary found the trap, is very similar to one owned by a brother of Karen. In fact her brother had one of only 2 registered vehicles in Ohio that matched the descriptions of that vehicle at the time.

Motive: Before the trap was found, her and Paul went through a divorce in which he was basically awarded everything. Custody of the children, Retirement funds, the house. After he was found guilty of attempted murder she gained everything that he had.

Opportunity: The person who was seen with the car was a man who resembled neither Karen nor Paul. This may have been either her new lover or her brother, or perhaps even someone she hired. But it is very unlikely that Paul would have had access to a car owned by a family member he was now estranged from. Also Paul had an alibi for that time period. Of all people involved, Karen was the one with the most access to that car. She had the most opportunity.

Other attempts to defame Paul: Karen did not end nor begin with this. After the divorce she moved in with Mary and had told Mary that she thought Paul was the one writing the letters. Not only that, but when Paul was in prison she tried to further prove it was him.

Therefore, I believe that Karen Sue Freshour framed Paul or was involved in his framing at the very least. She may have suspected Paul wrote the letters or used the letters as an opportunity to ruin Paul, copying the original writer's MO. But I think it is clear that she knows something at least.

Mary Gillespie may or may not have collaborated with Karen to frame Paul. But she is far from innocent in this matter. She did have an affair with Gordon Massie, and tried to hide it and cover it up althroughout. Afterwards the affair became public and she lied saying it happened after the death of Ron and after Massie divorced his wife.

The letterwriter may seem like some kind of bringer of justice. Some exposer of affair, scandals, crimes in a small community. But, he is not. Everything he did served him in a way, and very much intended harm for others. Harm for people who really were innocent. Many letters were found to have contained arsenic, a poisonous substance.

Sheriff Radcliffe, while I do not think he tried to cover the person who wrote the letters. I do think he tried to cover his own hide. The events that happened were an embarrassment to him, and instead of trying to solve the case and bring people to justice he tried to cover up as much as he could. He figured he could hide Freshour away in jail and when the letters continued he blamed it all on Freshour despite it being very improbable that he could have done that from prison.

Wow, I posted a similar theory in a different thread. Seems like you know a lot about the case, are you personally involved thelitteman? Anyway, here's my theory from another thread:

I don't think anyone of the Freshour/Gillespie family took the first few initial letters that seriously. Obviously, Mary Gillespie denied the affair and didn't admit to having one until AFTER the letters began (:rolleyes: ). I think they sent some letters to the man they suspected was the writer, all the while thinking it was more of a "game" than anything serious at that point. IIRC, the UM segment says the letters stopped for awhile after they mailed their letter to the person they suspected as the CW. Which seems to me that there's a good indication that the person they suspected truely was the "original" CW, or else he would have wrote back or reached out to them denying writing the letters. I think Ron Gillespie's death was truely an accident. I think he was drinking heavily on the night he died (the fact that his family says he left sober could be another case of a grieving family not wanting to accept the truth) when he got the phone call from the "suspect" whom received the letters from the Gillespie's & the Freshour's.

I think the "suspect" again called out the affair (this time over the phone instead of writing to Ron) and may have threatened Ron or his family. Ron, intoxicated and furious, left the house and died when his car crashed. A lot has been made on the fact that his gun was fired that night and I really don't have an explanation other than a possible misfire when he collided with the tree, or he may have fired it accidentally because he was intoxicated, I don't think we'll ever know the true reason behind the gun being fired. A couple of years after Ron's death, Paul and his wife seperated and eventually got divorced. I tend to think Paul's wife may have attempted to "set up" Freshour as the writer, and may have possibly had help from Mary Gillespie.

Who else, other than Paul Freshour, would have had access to Paul's gun? His wife. Who would want an affair to end involving their sister-in-law cheating on their brother? Paul's wife. Paul's wife, IMO, has a better motive in committing these crimes than Paul did. I think it's entirely possible that in an effort to frame Paul, she half-assed an attempt at rubbing the serial number off of the gun (knowing that it would be traced back to Paul) and had someone set up this crude booby trap (possibly even Mary Gillespie herself making up the story of "discovering" it), knowing it wouldn't go off, only to frame Paul. That really is the bottom line on the booby trap. Whoever set it up (due to its "crude" nature), obviously knew it was entirely possible that it wouldn't have went off and shot Mary (or it could have been discovered by an innocent bystander who was killed), so their main motive in setting the trap, IMHO, was not to kill Mary Gillespie, but to frame Paul Freshour. And again, who would have a motive in doing this? Paul's wife.

This is essentially what I have theorized has happened. I do think there was more than one CW, and that the townspeople used the CW moniker as a way to spread gossip about one another in the town. I do think the man who was initially suspected by the Gillespie's was in fact the original CW, and may very well have been the one sending more of the letters after Paul was incarcerated. I think the reason that there is a lack of interest in "solving" or updating this case is because Ron's death has been classified an accident and closed and the letters have ceased, so in the minds of LE in Circleville this case is closed. I just don't think (other than the initial letters the Gillespie's and Freshour's wrote to their "suspect") Paul Freshour had ANY involvement in writing any of the letters. The motive for him to have done so is nonexistent.

Hey, great minds think alike, no? I'm not personally involved, wasn't even walking at that time. Just a UM fan looking at old reruns and became interested in this story, like yourself and others. So with some free time I did a little research. I found that even with police interest in this case waning, it's still very fresh in one man's mind.

all I can say is I wish we knew what all Paul knows.The simple fact he came fwd on his own makes me think Ron's death was no accident,and he knows in fact more than he can say,even perhaps (probably) who the suspect is.His comments at the end of the segment about wanting someone to look into the letters and Ron's death are a strong hint at it indeed being the original letter writer that played a part in Ron's death.(and,that it wasn't an accident).JMO.

ETA: I do not know the role Paul's ex played in all of this,just that at the end of the segment,he says he's not going to look back at that (his ex) as if he's trying to tell her he's not interested in trying to convince her of anything,just that his intent on being on UM is to try and get someone to look into the letters and Ron's death.

from the link,his exact words:
“I'd like to see someone really look at this case on the letters, reopen the letter part of it and get in and find out who wrote the letters. I'd also like to see someone look into my former brother-in-law's death. Look, that's not my family anymore. That's my past. I'm not even going to look back at it. I've got a new family and a new future. But I would still like to see someone look at that accident real close and the letters.”

http://www.unsolved.com/ajaxfiles/mur_poison_pen_murder.htm

This might be the weirdest case I've seen on here.

First thing worth saying - the behaviour of law enforcement throughout the piece was seriously fishy. The handwriting test that was used as evidence in court sounds about as inadmissable and unlawful as it gets. Then there's the lead concerning the man who appears to be putting up the (quite ridiculous) booby trap designed to be found by Mary.

From Paul's role in the segment I leaned towards concluding that he was not the substantial player here - could well know more than he lets on, some of which might not weigh in his favour. That said, I'd be shocked if he played any role in this crazy chain of events that was not already covered by ten years in prison.

Mary Gillespie leaves us with far more questions than answers IMO.

Those first couple of letters that were kept concealed, then strangely enough phone calls to Ron follow. Seems like a trap from a distance, designed to lure an angry man into a dangerous situation.

The other bus driver doesn't find the 'shooter in a box' trap, but Mary does. This may well be because the man in the Camino was putting the thing up at the time, but the timing of it is pretty slick. Put there to be found, and setting someone up to blow their own head off in that way makes zero sense.

If Paul wanted her dead, surely he'd do it in such a way as gave him opportunity to dispose of the evidence? Why would he be so stupid as to plant his own gun with no guarantees as to what might happen?

At some point, whoever wrote the letters has decided to switch from people relating to this case to just anyone at random. As others have suggested, this could be just small townsfolk using the poison pen as a means by which to gossip about each other, but the key aspect is that they continued while Paul Freshour was in solitary confinement, so could not have been writing them.

The key to this case might well be to go right back to the very start and establish if this 'affair' was really taking place. Ordinarily its of zero importance, but the letter writer is most likely going to be one of the small circle who knew about it.

I agree about Mary,dazinho,in fact,the whole Gillespie family.not a one of them can be bothered to appear on the segment..really? wouldn't most ppl be more than anxious to say 'yes,let's reopen the case!', if it were their late spouse or relative???
..and the sheriff...obviously there is evidence he is hiding,IMO,as Paul said he agreed at first that Ron's death was suspect.later he recanted and ...who else would write a note to UM about the sheriff other than the sheriff himself??? 'don't hurt sheriff Radcliff??" he has something to hurt on himself,IMO.

oh and Mary did admit to the affair,which it appears was indeed going on,but I do think she lied as to the timing of it.she said it didn't start until after the letters,which was all too convenient,imo.

The motive for Paul Freshour wanted both Ron and Mary Gillespie dead is extremely thin if you ask me. They were his in-laws, would he really care that much (to the point of attempted murder) about an extramartial affair? And why set up a "crude" booby trap with no means or plan of recovering it before someone else came by and found it? Seems to me like Freshour was set up from day one.

I agree about Mary,dazinho,in fact,the whole Gillespie family.not a one of them can be bothered to appear on the segment..really? wouldn't most ppl be more than anxious to say 'yes,let's reopen the case!', if it were their late spouse or relative???
..and the sheriff...obviously there is evidence he is hiding,IMO,as Paul said he agreed at first that Ron's death was suspect.later he recanted and ...who else would write a note to UM about the sheriff other than the sheriff himself??? 'don't hurt sheriff Radcliff??" he has something to hurt on himself,IMO.

oh and Mary did admit to the affair,which it appears was indeed going on,but I do think she lied as to the timing of it.she said it didn't start until after the letters,which was all too convenient,imo.

The note was an obvious bait if you ask me. Whoever wrote it had to of realized that this would have made UM want to cover this case even more. I don't think it would be very smart on the Sheriff's part if he does have something to hide to write a note insinuating that he does. In my opinion whoever did it wanted the attention. Whether it was Freshour who wanted to coax UM to cover the case, the writer who wanted his work seen nationwide, or just someone stirring the pot.

honestly, for this case, i still believe that the writer is a member of the superintendent's family and may have found out about the affair and tried to put a stop to it.

honestly, for this case, i still believe that the writer is a member of the superintendent's family and may have found out about the affair and tried to put a stop to it.

IIRC the letters seemed to focus on how much of a "good person" the superintendent's wife was (it was repeated ad naseum) and it definitely sounded like someone who had intimate ties with her trying to defend her honor.

IIRC the letters seemed to focus on how much of a "good person" the superintendent's wife was (it was repeated ad naseum) and it definitely sounded like someone who had intimate ties with her trying to defend her honor.
which is why i think that this is someone the wife of the superintendent knows or is a family member of. to me that makes the most sense.

which is why i think that this is someone the wife of the superintendent knows or is a family member of. to me that makes the most sense.

Yes I agree - I am not abig believer in cover ups but there was either a lot of information left out or some important people were not talking in this case.

That rigged gun in the box scared me.

It rakes my brain as to why someone would target them in this manner? What was there about the Gillespies that someone would go and write these harassing letters and murder Ron? Surely someone would recognize the handwriting of whoever is doing this. Wonder if they can lift fingerprints from the letters and match them to anyone currently in prison?

It rakes my brain as to why someone would target them in this manner? What was there about the Gillespies that someone would go and write these harassing letters and murder Ron? Surely someone would recognize the handwriting of whoever is doing this. Wonder if they can lift fingerprints from the letters and match them to anyone currently in prison?
I do think Ron's widow was in on it (murdering her husb.),and Paul knows it.Thus she and Paul's ex set him up.They both had reasons to.
This is a much more simpler case than it apears,imo.The only question is who the original letter writer was,and I think Paul knows the answer to that,although he cannot come out and say it.I think this person,along with Mary,set Ron up to leave the house via the phone call and he was murdered,making it appear to be an accident.I think the sheriff was in on it,at least later he was (recall that at first,he agreed w/ Paul that it wasn't an accident).Thus the note saying 'don't hurt the sheriff'.
I also think it is likely there was more than one letter writer.

There's no question that there was more than one letter writer. The letters gave everyone with a grievance against people they knew the perfect cover for venting their emotions without having to identify themselves.

Kind of like the internet. :lol:

Yes I agree - I am not abig believer in cover ups but there was either a lot of information left out or some important people were not talking in this case. That rigged gun in the box scared me.
yeah, i do think they was a bit of a cover up here, mainly with the death of Ron and agree, that rigged gun scared me too.
It rakes my brain as to why someone would target them in this manner? What was there about the Gillespies that someone would go and write these harassing letters and murder Ron?
well, i cant answer for the murder of Ron, even the police cant because they dont think it was murder (if i am right). anyways to the letters. the letter writer SEEMS to be targeting them for a rumored affair between Mary and the superintendent of schools, so that's the motive behind this.
I do think Ron's widow was in on it (murdering her husb.),and Paul knows it. Thus she and Paul's ex set him up. They both had reasons to.
honestly, considering the stories i heard during the segment that would NOT shock me. in fact, it wouldnt shock me if the letter writer was right on the affiar and that his life was in danger and i think the writer even said that too! now this is all theory and guesswork, clearly, but i think that's an avenue that i would look into.

There's no question that there was more than one letter writer. The letters gave everyone with a grievance against people they knew the perfect cover for venting their emotions without having to identify themselves.

Kind of like the internet. :lol:
yes,RIGHT ON! :D they just had a different amo back then.can you imagine how this case would have played out nowadays?it would have been even more complicated.. emails,posts,websites,etc.

I think Ron was killed due to him being onto the affair,and Mary probably just didn't love him anymore anyway (no kidding,right).She may have been afraid she would lose everything,like Paul's wife did,if they got divorced,thus,Paul's ex and Mary set Paul up,and Mary and her lover (possibly Paul's ex in on it,too),along with help from the sheriff,murdered Ron.this is only a theory,but one that fits the best imo.

Ohio's Mysteries: The Circleville Letters (http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2012/jul/02/ohios-mysteries-circleville-letters-ar-1091058/)

Short little package put together by the local NBC affiliate in Columbus today. Apparently they are chronicling past Ohio mysteries.

Nothing new really, but it's interesting to see that it still has some visibility. I still cannot believe that the Sheriff believes Paul did it; what a rube.

Ohio's Mysteries: The Circleville Letters (http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2012/jul/02/ohios-mysteries-circleville-letters-ar-1091058/)

Short little package put together by the local NBC affiliate in Columbus today. Apparently they are chronicling past Ohio mysteries.

Nothing new really, but it's interesting to see that it still has some visibility. I still cannot believe that the Sheriff believes Paul did it; what a rube.

Thanks for the link. From what I've read about Sheriff Radcliff, I can believe it. It seems Pickaway Co folks either love him or hate him--and I guess enough love him to have voted him in office since the mid-60s. But I agree; that's silly.

Interesting video. It seems the letter writer spent a lot of time writing letters about topics other than Mary Gillispie (such as politics, etc.). The UM segment didn't mention that.

At the end of the story now it states family members contacted the station to let them know Paul recently passed away. What a shame that there wasn't a resolution in his lifetime.

It seems pretty clear to me Paul did it. Have you looked at his documents? He strikes me as a totally whacko guy. He easily could've had people mail the letters while he was in jail, or written them before he went to jail etc.

It seems pretty clear to me Paul did it. Have you looked at his documents? He strikes me as a totally whacko guy. He easily could've had people mail the letters while he was in jail, or written them before he went to jail etc.
i dont think he could've wrote the letters in jail, but he could've had help, i dont know if he did it or not. my guess still lends me to believe that the writer is someone (like a family member of the superintendent's wife or the wife herself) as the writer as their MAIN goal seemed to be on Mary's affair with the superintendent, so that's still my guess.

I don't think Paul was guilty of anything,and from watching the vid from the link,am thinking I hope they cke'd the obits when the letters suddenly stopped.I know Paul passed,but it was more recently,not the early 90's.
i suspect there is more to this case than they can say.

oh, one more thing, i think i mentioned this once or twice before, but i dont think the writer killed the husband, i think it could've been the superintendent or someone he hired to do the killing and i think the writer who wrote to Mary was more or less after Mary and was likely warning Mary's husband of danger.

What i dont get is the motivation the letter writer had for the harassment, intimidation and murder. Was it the superintendent of schools wife that found out about the affair and was fuming mad at mary because of it? Another thing that puzzles me is if it was Paul Feshour who wrote the letters, why would he care? What would it matter to him if mary was having an affair? Ron was his brother in law, but it seems like if he was upset about mary having an affair he would just confront her, why go though the whole intimidation, threats and murder route? Paul really had no motive for being he letter writer. He could have just confronted Mary. And bringing it to the attention of his brother in law makes no sense. He could have just said "I know marys having an affair and want you to know". For Paul to threaten the lives of mary and his brother in law over an affair seems pretty outrageous. He had no reason or motive to do it.

If mary was having an affair, how would that have mattered or effected Paul?

I think Paul’s wife was involved in this. I think she set up the booby traps and maybe sent the letters as well/ She was probably angry at Mary for the affair she was having behind her brothers back AND she was mad at Paul so why not kill two birds with one stone?

Note: I think another poster may have posted a similar opinion about Paul's wife*

I have no doubt in my mind that Paul wasn't involved. Kudos to him for not being bitter or angry about it. In the UM interview, he says he has a new family now and he just wants to put it behind him. It's sad that he already passed away and 10 yrs of his life were spent behind bars

It was me that had a similar opinion of his wife.After reading some of the documents,I found that Paul's ex had an affair,he'd hired a PI to prove it,and he'd divorced her,recieving custody of the kids and the house.No doubt this would be upsetting to her.(btw-Paul felt it was either she or Mary who sent the threatening letter to UM).So by getting Mary's help to set Paul up,(they were friends,she even lived with her for awhile),once he was convicted,his ex then got custody of not only the kids,but the house and his entire pension.Paul said he had no money to get a lawyer after that,and that was why.
So I think the original letter writer,and the set-up of Paul were 2 seperate events.I also think it was his ex sending the letters to him in prison.Recall the lines, "I told you when we set them up,they stay set up", and 'when are you going to beleive you aren't going to get out of there?'. Sounds like his ex to me..who else would have a reason to want him to stay there,if she had the house,kids and his money? I think she was just ensuring he would,by sending the letters.JMO.

Of course Radcliffe is still going to insist that he got the right guy back in the 80's. To say otherwise would admit that he put an innocent man behind bars for over ten years.

That sheriff who refuses to be interviewed has me really really suspicious. It seems like he knows something.

My guess is the sheriff knows that Paul Freshour is solely responsible and realizes it will do no good to go on tv about it.

No idea who did this, but I'm sure it wasn't Paul Freshour.

Have y'all seen the wordpress site for this case? Circleville Letters. I must have 5 posts before I can link, but it includes Freshour's appeal and a lot more info. from his side- very interesting.

I haven't had time to read every page, but was the principal or whatever he was, wife ever a suspect??? Maybe she hired someone (guy in car with booby trap) to do things and she wrote letters?

This case scared me so much!!

Have y'all seen the wordpress site for this case? Circleville Letters. I must have 5 posts before I can link, but it includes Freshour's appeal and a lot more info. from his side- very interesting.

I read it when he first put it up. But then he stopped updating. Have there been new posts recently?

My theory on the Circleville Letters:

I believe that the original writer of the letters was a disgruntled member of the school system. A person that was long tenured there and knew the subject of his/her letters. There are several reasons I believe the culprit had to be working for the schools:

His Vendetta against Superintendent Gordon Massie. In the first few letters, the writer implored Mary to come forward and report the affair to the board of education. This was well before he sent a letter directly to her husband Robert. He wanted to hurt Massie's reputation and get him fired from his position first and foremost. In some of the letters the writer suggests he was mistreated by the school.

Almost everyone he wrote about was involved with the school. The subject of most of his letters was someone involved in the school. Gordon Massie and Mary Gillispie. Also there were several letters accusing Judge Roger Kline of impregnating former teacher Vicki Koch and murdering her.

Now onto Ron Gillespie, who killed him? This one baffles me. He was well over the legal limit of BAC when he was driving, and was in a rage when he left the house. So it is not inconceivable that his death truly was an accident. But the coincidences are strong. The letters threatened Ron's life, and directly after he gets a phone call and goes to confront who he thinks it is, he dies. And what about the fired shot from his gun? The gun possibly could have went off on it's own from the force of the collision. Or he could have fired it at someone. Perhaps he confronted who he suspected and the suspect fleed, with Ron in pursuit firing a round from his gun then losing control? Or maybe the whole thing was a trap and the man forced Ron off the road with Ron getting a shot off before crashing.

As for who set up the booby trap that Mary found? I truly believe that Karen Freshour (Paul's ex-wife and Ron's sister) is responsible for that. Here is why I believe this:

Means: She had access to Paul's gun which was used in the trap and knew where it was. The black and yellow El Camino which was spotted by another driver right before Mary found the trap, is very similar to one owned by a brother of Karen. In fact her brother had one of only 2 registered vehicles in Ohio that matched the descriptions of that vehicle at the time.

Motive: Before the trap was found, her and Paul went through a divorce in which he was basically awarded everything. Custody of the children, Retirement funds, the house. After he was found guilty of attempted murder she gained everything that he had.

Opportunity: The person who was seen with the car was a man who resembled neither Karen nor Paul. This may have been either her new lover or her brother, or perhaps even someone she hired. But it is very unlikely that Paul would have had access to a car owned by a family member he was now estranged from. Also Paul had an alibi for that time period. Of all people involved, Karen was the one with the most access to that car. She had the most opportunity.

Other attempts to defame Paul: Karen did not end nor begin with this. After the divorce she moved in with Mary and had told Mary that she thought Paul was the one writing the letters. Not only that, but when Paul was in prison she tried to further prove it was him.

Therefore, I believe that Karen Sue Freshour framed Paul or was involved in his framing at the very least. She may have suspected Paul wrote the letters or used the letters as an opportunity to ruin Paul, copying the original writer's MO. But I think it is clear that she knows something at least.

Mary Gillespie may or may not have collaborated with Karen to frame Paul. But she is far from innocent in this matter. She did have an affair with Gordon Massie, and tried to hide it and cover it up althroughout. Afterwards the affair became public and she lied saying it happened after the death of Ron and after Massie divorced his wife.

The letterwriter may seem like some kind of bringer of justice. Some exposer of affair, scandals, crimes in a small community. But, he is not. Everything he did served him in a way, and very much intended harm for others. Harm for people who really were innocent. Many letters were found to have contained arsenic, a poisonous substance.

Sheriff Radcliffe, while I do not think he tried to cover the person who wrote the letters. I do think he tried to cover his own hide. The events that happened were an embarrassment to him, and instead of trying to solve the case and bring people to justice he tried to cover up as much as he could. He figured he could hide Freshour away in jail and when the letters continued he blamed it all on Freshour despite it being very improbable that he could have done that from prison.Re-reading this thread and saw this post detailing pretty close to what I believed happened. Paul Freshour had no motive or real connection to any of these events- but his wife did and had access to the very gun that was taken. How she was never considered but Paul was is very odd as there's nothing to rule her out. She even had the motive to frame him and had a better reason to be invested in the affair. I smell sloppy police work here.

How this case isn't better known is a mystery to me. It would probably be solvable if the right outside party looked into the whole situation in more depth, but unfortunately it seems no one has yet done so.

Sorry if this was brought up before, but I just noticed something. In an article written by Martin Yant (featured in the segment) about the Circleville writer, he states that Freshour and his ex-wife had gone through a messy divorce at the tail end of 1982. In February of 1983 is when Mary Gillespie found the "booby trap" on the side of the road containing Paul's gun. This cannot be a coincidence. This screams of a scorned woman, IMO, trying to set up Paul Freshour as the letter writer. I don't think the letter writer had any intention of following up on any of his/her threats. I think they hid behind a pen because they were too scared/intimidated to confront these people face to face. Which is why they went the letter writing route. That, in their mind, was the only way they could successfully intimidate people. And it worked for awhile. But I think that Mary Gillespie and her sister decided to use one of the "threats" from the letters to frame Freshour. The article mentions that Freshour remarried in 83 shortly before he was incarcerated, so that perhaps would have been a motive for his ex-wife to conspire to do something like this to him.

Another interesting tidbit from the article:

In 1994, a letter was sent to Martin Yant (or the newspaper he wrote for) written in the same exact type of "script" the letter writer had used since 1977. It reads, in part:

"Writer almost had another innocent man put in prison ha ha: David Longberry would have if the man in prison now had not tried to trick writer with writers own writing for homebreaker Gillespie: see what he got ha ha:"

Now remembering the UM segment, the Gillespie's got together with the Freshour's and had discussed who they thought was behind the letters. Paul sat there and wrote a letter dictated to him by the Gillespie's and sent it to whoever this person was. And, as the UM segment states, for awhile, the letters stopped. Now this means, IMO, that whoever the Gillespie's suspected in the first place was the one responsible for the majority of the letters, or else the writer would have never made a reference to it in his letter in 1994 about Freshour tricking to trick him originally. This would be a fairly easy "mystery" to solve, IMO, if only we knew the identity of the person who Mary Gillespie thought was responsible for writing the letters.

Another interesting tidbit from the article: police initially believed the letter writer to have been the superintendent's son, because he shared the same initials as what the CW signed his letters as.

I, too, am 95% sold on the theory of Karen being the letter writer. If she felt "wronged" by Paul and the courts, etc (which clearly she did) and now Mary was running around on her brother....Karen had the opportunity to get back at Paul while exposing Mary as the cheater she was. Two birds, one stone. Everything that was already said about Karen above just fits! Plus, LE said that they did believe the writer was a woman.

I am curious as to where all of the info that was not from the UM segment is coming from. I have searched online in the past and found nothing on this case other than links to this message board. Have there been any books or documentaries about it?

Also, it looked to me from the pictures of the letters shown in the segment that at least two different people wrote the letters as at least two different writing styles were shown on the segment. I thought it strange this was not mentioned in the segment at all.

I am curious as to where all of the info that was not from the UM segment is coming from. I have searched online in the past and found nothing on this case other than links to this message board. Have there been any books or documentaries about it?

Also, it looked to me from the pictures of the letters shown in the segment that at least two different people wrote the letters as at least two different writing styles were shown on the segment. I thought it strange this was not mentioned in the segment at all.

Someone sent me scanned articles that Martin Yant had wrote about the case after the UM segment aired. They discuss a lot of things left out of the UM segment. Unfortunately, the person who sent them to me sent 2 of the same pages, so I only have half of the article. The article is mostly a piece to show how Freshour is innocent and was set up. It doesn't seem to hint that his ex-wife was involved.

I, too, am 95% sold on the theory of Karen being the letter writer. If she felt "wronged" by Paul and the courts, etc (which clearly she did) and now Mary was running around on her brother....Karen had the opportunity to get back at Paul while exposing Mary as the cheater she was. Two birds, one stone. Everything that was already said about Karen above just fits! Plus, LE said that they did believe the writer was a woman.

I am in agreement. It would make complete sense to me. Many people overlook women when it comes to these things. I'm not completely sure why but everyone is always pointing to a man first when trying to find a guilty party. In my experience there are as many women crazies out there as men.

Why why why hasn't this case been solved!?!? so frustrating!

Why why why hasn't this case been solved!?!? so frustrating!

In L.E.'s eyes, the case is closed and over.

I think everyone is in universal agreement that Paul Freshour was framed and was innocent, and was NOT the Circleville Writer. My personal opinion was that Ron Gillespie's death was an accident, and that Mary Gillespie and Freshour's ex-wife set up the booby trap to frame Paul. Since the Circleville Writer never did anything to warrant an arrest (outside of possible harassment charges), there really isn't anything to solve anymore, IMO.

ETA: Paul Freshour claimed that some of the letters written contained arsenic poison, which could in fact warrant up to an attempted murder charge. But since LE believes he was the writer, the case is closed in their eyes.

Another creepy little tidbit I stumbled upon. In 1980, a teacher named Vicki Koch was murdered, and is still unsolved to this day. Paul Freshour claims (in one of his documents) that the Circleville Writer made numerous references to this murder in his letters, saying that the writer claimed that Koch was pregnant with the illegitimate child of a state prosecutor (who later became a judge, named Kline), and that Kline ordered her murder because he feared that if it was found out that he had an affair, it would ruin his law career aspirations. I googled "Vicki Koch" and came across a Topix discussion on it. On page 2, there is a post by "TheLetterWriter" from 2012 that reads EXACTLY how the Circleville Writer used to write. It says:

"HER NAME: WAS VICKI KOCH: KOCH IS PRONOUNCED AS COOK: SHE WAS MURDERED: IN AUGUST: 1980: ON THE ORDERS OF K: SHE WAS PREGNANT: WITH HIS: ILLEGITIMATE: CHILD:"

Someone else asks who "K" is, and someone else responds "Judge Kline". Could this be just a silly internet guy "pretending" to be the letter writer, or could it in fact be the same guy writing the letters? Knowing about the Koch/Kline connection would seem to indicate the latter.

I checked for any other posts from TheLetterWriter and the only other one I found was this:

"Hey cville. What is your deepest darkest secret?"

TheLetterWriter
Grandview, MO

#44 Jul 16, 2012

THIS: IS MY DEEPEST: DARKEST: SECRET:

I think Paul was framed, too.

Very interesting stuff you guys found online about "TheLetterWriter". I wonder what's up with that.

I think Paul was framed, too.

Very interesting stuff you guys found online about "TheLetterWriter". I wonder what's up with that.

I agree. If the internet wasn't filled with people pretending to be other people, I'd actually be quite frightened by the statements "TheLetterWriter" made and the fonts and texts he/she used. Obviously it was all meant to be similar to the actual letters. Could be just someone being an idiot, but a little spooky none the less.

This case reminds me a little bit of the Wendy Camp case: A relatively small town, certain people are in other people's pockets, many know what's really gone on....but no one wants to say anything. But as TheCars1986 said, in LE's opinion, The Circleville Letters case is solved and closed. :(

Could be just someone being an idiot, but a little spooky none the less.

My first thought was that "TheLetterWriter" was just some idiot trying to be funny, but Vicki Koch's murder was a very obscure case, that only people from the Circleville area would know about. On the first page on Topix various people are trying to remember the details and her name to no avail. It's only when "TheLetterWriter" makes a post, does he get the name right, as well as the person whom she allegedly was having an affair. I went and read through 50% of Paul Freshour's appeals to the FBI (it's over 150 pages long), and Freshour makes several references to rumors around Circleville involving a prosecutor named Kline having an affair with Vicki Koch, getting her pregnant, and killing her. Not only does this back up what "TheLetterWriter" was saying, but they also used the exact same style of writing as the original Circleville writer in their response.

As the case went to court, the letters must be out there for the public to read freely. Does anyone know where the complete text of the letters or maybe scans/photos of them can be read?

As the case went to court, the letters must be out there for the public to read freely. Does anyone know where the complete text of the letters or maybe scans/photos of them can be read?

The only thing I've ever found online is just what's been put on the UM site and the UM wikia.

If google is to be believed, Circleville, OH is in Pickaway County.

I don't know what court heard the case but here's a few links. The last one requires a paid membership to look at the records, but there are several criminal records available for men named Paul Freshour. I don't know which one is him but it's probably not the 112 year old guy. lol

These could be possible starting points for finding where the information can be viewed.

Circleville Newspaper: http://www.circlevilletoday.com/

Circleville Municipal Court: http://www.circlevillecourt.com/

Pickaway County Ohio Government Offices: http://www.pickaway.org/

Pickaway Public Records: http://publicrecords.onlinesearches.com/OH_Pickaway.htm

My first thought was that "TheLetterWriter" was just some idiot trying to be funny, but Vicki Koch's murder was a very obscure case, that only people from the Circleville area would know about. On the first page on Topix various people are trying to remember the details and her name to no avail. It's only when "TheLetterWriter" makes a post, does he get the name right, as well as the person whom she allegedly was having an affair. I went and read through 50% of Paul Freshour's appeals to the FBI (it's over 150 pages long), and Freshour makes several references to rumors around Circleville involving a prosecutor named Kline having an affair with Vicki Koch, getting her pregnant, and killing her. Not only does this back up what "TheLetterWriter" was saying, but they also used the exact same style of writing as the original Circleville writer in their response.
Things that make you go "hmm...."
I wonder.

Municipal court can be accessed : onlinedocket.circlevillecourt.com

The thing they didn't mention on the show/newspaper is the sheer number of people that have got letters. I am pretty certain the last letters recieved in the area were around 2001 or 2002 and still dealing with the original case (Still in the extraordinarily creepy format).

As stated, some truly have tied the Koch case to it all, and I think some around here do agree. I'd also have to find the name of the lady, but there was another mysterious murder here in town in the early to mid 70s they still talk about on our local topix pretty often. Some have suggested that there's even a 3rd murder involved in this whole case.

It's all kind of mindblowing, yet very interesting, as Circleville & the county as a whole are quite nice and very safe, yet still marked with these horrific events.

Welcome to the board!

Welcome to the board!


i second this!

Municipal court can be accessed : onlinedocket.circlevillecourt.com

The thing they didn't mention on the show/newspaper is the sheer number of people that have got letters. I am pretty certain the last letters recieved in the area were around 2001 or 2002 and still dealing with the original case (Still in the extraordinarily creepy format).

As stated, some truly have tied the Koch case to it all, and I think some around here do agree. I'd also have to find the name of the lady, but there was another mysterious murder here in town in the early to mid 70s they still talk about on our local topix pretty often. Some have suggested that there's even a 3rd murder involved in this whole case.

It's all kind of mindblowing, yet very interesting, as Circleville & the county as a whole are quite nice and very safe, yet still marked with these horrific events.

Welcome! Thanks for sharing this info.

Sorry if this was brought up before, but I just noticed something. In an article written by Martin Yant (featured in the segment) about the Circleville writer, he states that Freshour and his ex-wife had gone through a messy divorce at the tail end of 1982. In February of 1983 is when Mary Gillespie found the "booby trap" on the side of the road containing Paul's gun. This cannot be a coincidence. This screams of a scorned woman, IMO, trying to set up Paul Freshour as the letter writer. I don't think the letter writer had any intention of following up on any of his/her threats. I think they hid behind a pen because they were too scared/intimidated to confront these people face to face. Which is why they went the letter writing route. That, in their mind, was the only way they could successfully intimidate people. And it worked for awhile. But I think that Mary Gillespie and her sister decided to use one of the "threats" from the letters to frame Freshour. The article mentions that Freshour remarried in 83 shortly before he was incarcerated, so that perhaps would have been a motive for his ex-wife to conspire to do something like this to him.

Another interesting tidbit from the article:

In 1994, a letter was sent to Martin Yant (or the newspaper he wrote for) written in the same exact type of "script" the letter writer had used since 1977. It reads, in part:

"Writer almost had another innocent man put in prison ha ha: David Longberry would have if the man in prison now had not tried to trick writer with writers own writing for homebreaker Gillespie: see what he got ha ha:"

Now remembering the UM segment, the Gillespie's got together with the Freshour's and had discussed who they thought was behind the letters. Paul sat there and wrote a letter dictated to him by the Gillespie's and sent it to whoever this person was. And, as the UM segment states, for awhile, the letters stopped. Now this means, IMO, that whoever the Gillespie's suspected in the first place was the one responsible for the majority of the letters, or else the writer would have never made a reference to it in his letter in 1994 about Freshour tricking to trick him originally. This would be a fairly easy "mystery" to solve, IMO, if only we knew the identity of the person who Mary Gillespie thought was responsible for writing the letters.

Another interesting tidbit from the article: police initially believed the letter writer to have been the superintendent's son, because he shared the same initials as what the CW signed his letters as.


Rereading some of the documents that Paul had posted online makes mention of a David Longberry. After researching him, he was actually wanted years later for rape on an 11 year old. He went on the run and hanged himself not too long after. According to the docs, he's considered the prime suspect for being the (original) letter writer because he was a fellow bus driver of Mary's.


Bombshell!

Paul Freshour was also an extra in Brubaker (1980) according to The Ohio Observer (Feb. 1994)

After pouring through hundreds of pages made available by Paul before he died, I was able to garner a lot of interesting information.

-One of the most important being where Mary Gillispie found the "booby trap". It appears to have been placed at a crow's foot in the road located at Scioto-Darby Road and Five Points Pike.
There was a sign as well as foot prints (noted to be much smaller than Paul's) leading up to it. While we know that sign was pointed at Mary's daughter, it said on the side:

-"For As Long As [Gordon] Massie F*cks Employees".

-Another major jab at Mary and Gordon's affair.

-The vehicle, seen where the sign was placed, 20 minutes before Mary found it was originally described as a yellow El Camino. It was then changed to an orange El Camino. Once it was reported by two newsprint agencies at a later date, family members related to Paul's ex-wife threated harm and even death to the writers of the articles. It was known that a yellow El Camino was owned by either Paul's ex-wife's boyfriend or brother. The El Camino in question was one of two in the state that fit the description.

-It was also reported that no one else had seen the "booby trap" at the location. Only the sign. Mary "discovered" it while no one was around. :lol:

-The booby trap in question did not go off as expected because it was not designed to even fire. When it was used in court as evidence, it was dissasembled in pieces and thought to have been thrown together.

-The box that contained the gun was a chalk box, readily available at any store. Yet, Radcliff stated that boxes like this could be found all over Paul's place of work.

-Mary told Radcliff that she "pulled it down [booby trap] and took it home with her for two hours before opening it and discovering the gun."

-Many of the letters contained what was described as "offensive, risque, and lewd" writing in them. Mostly regarding local government, school officials, and law enforcement. Sadly, a lot of that writing proved to be truthful. The coroner at the time was exposed as a child molestor. He denied it, retired, and moved to Florida. Later it came to light that he had in fact molested several children. He did no prison time.

-After the divorce became final, Paul's ex-wife move into a trailer on property owned by Mary, the same property where her and Ron had lived years before. Mary even went so far to evict her own parents from the trailer after her father protested when he saw Gordon Massie visiting her one evening.

-Mary was living with Radcliff while the trial against Paul was occurring.

-One of the major themes that have been hit on on sitcomsonline is that a Circleville teacher had been murdered by Roger Kline. Her name was Vicki Koch (pronounced Cook). She was 25 and supposedly pregnant with Kline's child.

-There is more than one writer. As of the early 90's there were two different writers.

-The B.H. are found on many of the letters and some are even signed "Bob Hibbs".

-The early letters were signed W. Massie. William Massie is Gordon's son.

-Finally, some of the letters contained arsenic in them. Circleville is an agricultural town. Farmers at the time could readily get arsenic without any hassle. Mary Gillispie, pryor to Ron's murder, raised hogs and had easy access to arsenic.


If you ever get a chance to read his papers on wordpress, I definately suggest it. Paul did not have the best grammar of anyone, but he does make a lot of interesting connections. In the end, I feel that Paul was a victim of his ex-wife and Mary. Two women with nothing to lose, a chip on their shoulder, and will someday have the truth unravel on them.

But this leaves the final question of: "Who is the Circleville Writer?" After thousands of letters, many of which came from the same two people, do people really want to know who the writer is? Of course we do, there are so many unanswered questions about Radcliff and Ron Gillispie. Until the writer emerges or new letters surface, we go without answers.

Is Mary Gillespie still alive? Does anyone know?

Is Mary Gillespie still alive? Does anyone know?


She's still alive and it's hard to pinpoint her as she hasn't made public appearances but Paul's daughter does have a Facebook.

Do you have the link for her Facebook please?

Is Mary Gillespie still alive? Does anyone know?

I haven't found anything on Mary Gillespie, but I think I've found someone closely related to Paul's ex-wife. It seems like Paul's family shunned him one he was (wrongfully) convicted of attempted murder. Which makes the case even more sad. I found an obituary where his son died, and it made no mention of Paul being his father.

That is sad because i would of thought that after Paul was released they would of embraced his release because the letters were proven not to be written by him. He seemed fairly genuine and down to earth in the segment

That is sad because i would of thought that after Paul was released they would of embraced his release because the letters were proven not to be written by him. He seemed fairly genuine and down to earth in the segment

As far as I can tell, his ex-wife essentially "poisoned" them to thinking he was a bad guy.

Do you have the link for her Facebook please?


It's been so long that I forget her name but I do remember that it is in his obituary and she's the only one in Ohio with that name. But she is friends with 2 Marys and one is in her 60's/70's, so I'm sure that it is Mary Gillespie.

It appears that Dawn's profile is mostly private now. Michael certainly left some scathing remarks for Paul on his obituary.

I'm not going to post it here, but if you search hard enough in the papers that Paul made public, Mary's social security number is present in full. It would be enough to start a search for her. She has remarried if memory serves.

After pouring through hundreds of pages made available by Paul before he died, I was able to garner a lot of interesting information.

-One of the most important being where Mary Gillispie found the "booby trap". It appears to have been placed at a crow's foot in the road located at Scioto-Darby Road and Five Points Pike.
There was a sign as well as foot prints (noted to be much smaller than Paul's) leading up to it. While we know that sign was pointed at Mary's daughter, it said on the side:

-"For As Long As [Gordon] Massie F*cks Employees".

-Another major jab at Mary and Gordon's affair.

-The vehicle, seen where the sign was placed, 20 minutes before Mary found it was originally described as a yellow El Camino. It was then changed to an orange El Camino. Once it was reported by two newsprint agencies at a later date, family members related to Paul's ex-wife threated harm and even death to the writers of the articles. It was known that a yellow El Camino was owned by either Paul's ex-wife's boyfriend or brother. The El Camino in question was one of two in the state that fit the description.

-It was also reported that no one else had seen the "booby trap" at the location. Only the sign. Mary "discovered" it while no one was around. :lol:

-The booby trap in question did not go off as expected because it was not designed to even fire. When it was used in court as evidence, it was dissasembled in pieces and thought to have been thrown together.

-The box that contained the gun was a chalk box, readily available at any store. Yet, Radcliff stated that boxes like this could be found all over Paul's place of work.

-Mary told Radcliff that she "pulled it down [booby trap] and took it home with her for two hours before opening it and discovering the gun."

-Many of the letters contained what was described as "offensive, risque, and lewd" writing in them. Mostly regarding local government, school officials, and law enforcement. Sadly, a lot of that writing proved to be truthful. The coroner at the time was exposed as a child molestor. He denied it, retired, and moved to Florida. Later it came to light that he had in fact molested several children. He did no prison time.

-After the divorce became final, Paul's ex-wife move into a trailer on property owned by Mary, the same property where her and Ron had lived years before. Mary even went so far to evict her own parents from the trailer after her father protested when he saw Gordon Massie visiting her one evening.

-Mary was living with Radcliff while the trial against Paul was occurring.

-One of the major themes that have been hit on on sitcomsonline is that a Circleville teacher had been murdered by Roger Kline. Her name was Vicki Koch (pronounced Cook). She was 25 and supposedly pregnant with Kline's child.

-There is more than one writer. As of the early 90's there were two different writers.

-The B.H. are found on many of the letters and some are even signed "Bob Hibbs".

-The early letters were signed W. Massie. William Massie is Gordon's son.

-Finally, some of the letters contained arsenic in them. Circleville is an agricultural town. Farmers at the time could readily get arsenic without any hassle. Mary Gillispie, pryor to Ron's murder, raised hogs and had easy access to arsenic.


If you ever get a chance to read his papers on wordpress, I definately suggest it. Paul did not have the best grammar of anyone, but he does make a lot of interesting connections. In the end, I feel that Paul was a victim of his ex-wife and Mary. Two women with nothing to lose, a chip on their shoulder, and will someday have the truth unravel on them.

But this leaves the final question of: "Who is the Circleville Writer?" After thousands of letters, many of which came from the same two people, do people really want to know who the writer is? Of course we do, there are so many unanswered questions about Radcliff and Ron Gillispie. Until the writer emerges or new letters surface, we go without answers.

Yes, the Koch murder is still a VERY BIG DEAL here in town. If you do some digging on the local Circleville Facebook groups, you'll find that within the past year or so there was a group of about 20 people who protested in front of former Sheriff Radcliff's house.

That is sad because i would of thought that after Paul was released they would of embraced his release because the letters were proven not to be written by him. He seemed fairly genuine and down to earth in the segment

There's a few rumors out there concerning Paul's family (Ex wife or wife) being in on the whole conspiracy too. That she helped Mary or someone on that 'side' steal the gun used in the 'trap'.

Yes, the Koch murder is still a VERY BIG DEAL here in town. If you do some digging on the local Circleville Facebook groups, you'll find that within the past year or so there was a group of about 20 people who protested in front of former Sheriff Radcliff's house.



There's a few rumors out there concerning Paul's family (Ex wife or wife) being in on the whole conspiracy too. That she helped Mary or someone on that 'side' steal the gun used in the 'trap'.


It's more than a few rumors. It's well documented in the court paperwork to the FBI that she had access.

Every time I hear about this case, or come back and look at it myself I can help but think that Sheriff Radcliffe was the main man behind it, perhaps with an accomplice but I'm not sure about that.

The one thing I always remember is how one of the letters to Paul in prison mentions how if he got out Radcliffe would take his place. I believe this was to make people think he had nothing to do with it. He also had the means to pull it off, including being able to railroad Paul and being in charge of the investigations around the letters and the 'trap' that Paul was arrested for.

I also read that Radcliffe claimed that they'd caught Paul sending the letters from prison, while in isolation, which wouldn't be possible, surely. So why would he say that? He's either covering for poor police work which sent away an innocent man or trying to keep Paul in the frame as the writer so no one ever investigates him or any possible accomplice.

The affair was clearly going on before the letters despite what MG says - but I don't think she is involved in it - what did she really have to gain by bringing it up?

The phone call? I believe it could have been Radcliffe luring his target out to get rid of him. He may have even told him that they knew who it was but they had to let them go for lack of evidence or something. This is why he was angry and got his gun before running out to go met the supposed writer and intimidate them into stopping the letters.

Really wish I could go through some of the letters, particularly the ones from the 70s, would really help work this one out.

That is sad because i would of thought that after Paul was released they would of embraced his release because the letters were proven not to be written by him. He seemed fairly genuine and down to earth in the segment

Wait, what? When was he officially exonerated? :confused:

Wait, what? When was he officially exonerated? :confused:

He wasn't. He was paroled after serving 10 years in prison.

If the former sheriff Radcliffe was indeed on it, that might clinch that this will never be fully solved. His son succeeded him as sheriff a few years back.

If the former sheriff Radcliffe was indeed on it, that might clinch that this will never be fully solved. His son succeeded him as sheriff a few years back.

I don't think he was. I think he figured putting Freshour away would stop the letters, and when it didn't, in an effort to save face he refused to admit he was wrong and stuck to his "Freshour's smuggling letters out" theory.

This entire mystery seems ripped straight out of Desperate Housewives. I'm surprised there's never been a tv show or movie based on Circleville.

This entire mystery seems ripped straight out of Desperate Housewives. I'm surprised there's never been a tv show or movie based on Circleville.

Seriously. I half wonder if it's never been adapted because the general public would never believe something like this went on!

I don't think he was. I think he figured putting Freshour away would stop the letters, and when it didn't, in an effort to save face he refused to admit he was wrong and stuck to his "Freshour's smuggling letters out" theory.

I do agree with you. Even back when I saw this case originally in the early 1990s, I thought it was simple incompetence and still think that today. I live about 30 miles from Circleville and it's the UM fan in me that every time I hear his or his son's name, I immediately think of this case.

Here's an article about the Circleville Letters incident.

http://www.onlyinyourstate.com/ohio/number-one-unsolved-mystery-oh/