who are they?

Aw, man! I wanted to name Paul Pollis! :lol:

Jule Caylor!!!!

Judy Groezinger

Aw, man! I wanted to name Paul Pollis! :lol:

Co-sign

I just watched the Doreen Marpheo case for the first time this past weekend (THANKS CRYSTALDAWN!!) and was actually upset that old Stephen wasn't arrested based solely on his UM appearance. His demeanor during the interview, when he tries to spin it that he's sick of being the focal point of speculation made him look terribly guilty. Then bit after bit of evidence starts piling up, like the typewriter and hiring the PI, and its wholly apparent that the guy is your prototypical jealous/suspicious mysoginistic scumbag creep. But the worst thing for me was watching him try and gaze wistfully out the window at the end of the segment, as if he's just longing for his wife to come walking up the street any second. Just him and his mullet and his cup o' joe having a tender Season's Select moment...celebrate the moments of your liiiiiife....

So the UPDATE comes and unfortunately it only gets to the seceond line before cutting into the next segmet (CURSE YOU, CRYSTALDAWN!!!), so I know he topped himself but I couldn't tell why. Reading on the site I noticed that its because he suspected his new girlfriend was cheating on him, so he kills her, then himself. I wonder how Doreen's mom and sis felt when they got that news?

A Google search will confirm that Marfeo DID in fact, kill his ex-girlfriend, followed by himself. From my understanding, he maintained his innocence regarding Doreen's disappearance until the day he died.

Chad Noe and Paul Pollis are pretty bad, but I can only think of ONE person even more guilty than those two fools.... Larry Gibson. That blank look all over his guilty as sin face as he goes on and on about how there is absolutely no proof that his little girl is lying about the dissapearence of his son, blah, blah, blah - than the camera freezes and the update says the little girl blew the whistle on him.

Larry Gibson - that man makes Chad Noe and Paul Pollis look like pillars of society.

Jule Caylor!!!!

I cannot BELIEVE I forgot Jule Caylor, who was featured in your avatar for several months. You have my permission to slap me for forgetting him. :lol:

Sam Patel !!!

I suppose he doesn't qualify as "guiltiest" based on his performance in the segment (he was actually a good liar and had a consistent story), but ALL the facts point right at him. He is guilty as sin. No one else had the time, motive, or opportunity to kill that woman in that parking lot.

There are others, unlike Patel, who were guilty and did horrible acting jobs. Maybe this one should be renamed "lousiest liars?" lol

Rizzo case strikes a chord here too.

Judy Groezinger


That was my first thought. Since it's taken I'll say Donnie Hansen, it's absolutely ludicrous!

We're getting there. Scott Peterson is a prime example of being convicted on circumstantial evidence. It's a slippery slope, though, as I'm sure you'd all agree.

And yes, if circumstantial evidence were enough to garner a conviction, I'm sure that Chad Noe and Paul Pollis would go down for sure.

Speaking of guilty parties, did anyone else think that Kathy Bonderson's husband was suspect?

Jeffrey "I hate hippies" MacDonald

Jeffrey "I hate hippies" MacDonald

You're getting as annoying as Akook's old obsession with Bill Whacker...

Whoever the guy was that put his wife's body in a plastic bag in his trunk (which his child saw) and said something in his interview like "never have, never will" and then Donny Hanson. Absolutely guilty of helping set the fire that killed his twin sisters.

You're getting as annoying as Akook's old obsession with Bill Whacker...

And I'm sure you would say that if I agreed with you. Have your opinion. I'll have mine.

And I'm sure you would say that if I agreed with you. Have your opinion. I'll have mine.

If you had done any research you'd have found I think MacDonald is guilty but I don't spend 95% of my time letting the whole board know do I? Have you got anything else to contribute other that "Mac the Knife is guilty!!"?

All I can say is: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:

I like this smilie. About the same size and friskiness as my apricot poodle Awsi, who I honored with my user name. He died in July 2005, nearly 16. Dooger is what I called a dog as a young boy. My parents made a big deal out of that so it stuck:

:dog:

And hey, I finally found a left handed smilie:

:crybaby:

:confused:

order in the court?

If you had done any research you'd have found I think MacDonald is guilty but I don't spend 95% of my time letting the whole board know do I? Have you got anything else to contribute other that "Mac the Knife is guilty!!"?

And if you would do any research, you would find not only that I have offered a lot on this case, but I also post often on other cases. So, don't give me this 95% business.

And if you would do any research, you would find not only that I have offered a lot on this case, but I also post often on other cases. So, don't give me this 95% business.

I have done my research sunshine and it's over half of your posts are MacDonald related, sorry but it seems more. We all know how you feel on Mac but we don't need to be reminded of it time after time.

If you've done your research, then you would know that I have detailed my opinions many times.

Here's a novel idea for you, "sunshine". If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

Well I see we're having our weekly Jeffrey MacDonald fight. This case seems to really hit a nerve with the posters and opinions are very strong both ways so lets just respect everyone's opinions and if need be "agree to disagree".

Whoever the guy was that put his wife's body in a plastic bag in his trunk (which his child saw) and said something in his interview like "never have, never will" and then Donny Hanson. Absolutely guilty of helping set the fire that killed his twin sisters.

I believe "never have never will" is Paul Pollis; one of his cornier quotes: "I'm not that kinda father, never have been, never will be" ... I kinda wish Paul would come back and drop some more knowledge on us "uneducateds" ... Paul, are you still weighing about a buck-twenty, smoking crack, drinking Mad Dog and keeping a tidy house? Keep us in the loop, `biggun.

For my money the guiltiest person on UM was the lesbo who moved her lover into the house after they killed her husband. Yeah lady, people are "gonna talk" when you move your "friend" in with you a couple of weeks after your husband is mysteriously murdered.

For my money the guiltiest person on UM was the lesbo who moved her lover into the house after they killed her husband. Yeah lady, people are "gonna talk" when you move your "friend" in with you a couple of weeks after your husband is mysteriously murdered.

Oh, come on! When I did it, no one said a word.


In all seriousness, though, I agree. I had forgotten about her. One could make the same argument for Darlie Routier with the silly string...


The :bash: was me making an attempt at easing the mood in this thread... felt it was getting nasty, so I reverted to the :bash: joke from a previous thread where we talked about the Karate Kid. But I did like Justin's theory of "Order in the Court!" Wish I had thought of it myself. ;)

No offense intended; just an abbreviated version of "closeted murdering lesbian psycho" = "lesbo"

that whole segment with "Mark Nichols" was just annoying...it was like, why is this even on unsolved mysteries, he obviously did it. You can just tell he seems like the type of person, not to offend anyone, but he seemed semi-********(in all seriousness) and he reminded me of that character I think Lenny from I forget the name of the book, catcher in the rye? maybe , I don't remember, the one who is big and dumb and gets angry and kills a mouse. He obviously did it, and for him to plea to his wife through the camera to come home, why did they even let him do that.

I have another one, Don Dixon, Mr. "There are no exit wounds!" from the Eric Tamiyasu case. Hell, choose ANYONE from that case. Sheriff Wampum, Eric's date, they were all in on it if you ask me.

Oh, come on! When I did it, no one said a word.

:eek:

I said Sam Patel early on in this thread, but no one responded. Can I get a big "hell yeah" from anyone who agrees with me that this man is guilty?

His actions before the murder were weird. Coming to the woman's house and then leaving several times in one night. I am sorry, I forget the murdered woman's name. The daughter of the woman was on the phone with her mother when Sam kept coming to her house late that night. Sam denies this ever happened, but I don't buy it. He is a good liar, but guilty nonetheless.

I cannot BELIEVE I forgot Jule Caylor, who was featured in your avatar for several months. You have my permission to slap me for forgetting him. :lol:

Okay :schmack:

:lol:

Thiussant I totally agree with you about thinking Sam Patel is guilty. That part was so gross about the vomit on the pavement being consistent with what he ate at Applebee's. The story was so ridiculous about him deciding that night after dark to start riding his bicycle which is his lame reasoning of why he had to remove his shirt. Give me a break.

What about Susan Harrison's husband (I forget his name)? He seemed pretty shady to me. I've never actually seen the episode about him, but I read the book that Susan's sister wrote about the case, and the husband came off as being guilty as sin.

Charli-Ann

Hmm, lets see: Wayne Hecker, Mark Nichols, Jule Caylor, Chad Noe, Paul Pollis, Stephen Marfeo, Judy Grozeinger, Donovan Jacobs, Kathy Bonderson's husband Rob, Jim Harrison, Paul Flores who I believe was involved in that one woman's disapperance that I believe Scott Peterson was also investigated for because he went to the same college at the time but he was ruled out as a suspect, Mike Reimer, there is several. One guy I am actually sort of on the fence about is Rob Page. I used to think he was for sure guilty but if he were, would he honestly say all the stuff he did and admit he was lying?

Larry Gibson is another guilty one although to this day he still proclaims his innocence and at one point had a site up for his missing son and reward money and stuff. Gibson in my opinion should just be thankful he was only convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter and he should just ride off into the sunset. Gibson was arrested three or four years after his son disapperaed and he took it to trial, was convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter and was sentenced to 3 years in prison, he was released after serving a year and a half and the last that was known about him he was living in Montana.

Also even though he wasnt a murderer he was acting guilty, the sheriff that was interviewed in the Lisa Kimmell segment, Ron Ketchum. I mean I dont get the guy, as it turns out he wasnt involved yet he acted so weird, like refusing to answer for his wherabouts on the evening when Lisa disappeared, I think he even refused to give a DNA sample for a while and he killed himself in 2000. He was actually looked at as a suspect for a while because he was seen in a patrol car in a part of the county that wasnt far from where Lisa was.

What about Susan Harrison's husband (I forget his name)? He seemed pretty shady to me. I've never actually seen the episode about him, but I read the book that Susan's sister wrote about the case, and the husband came off as being guilty as sin.

Charli-Ann

I have that segment. Jim Harrison is way guilty. His attempts to make the viewer sympathize with him were lame ("she used foul language.") Brother. Given that Susan was about to leave him for good, he's definitely the one that did it IMO.

Rizzo case strikes a chord here too.

Hey I was watching the Rizzo case on the BM Set last night, well listening to the commentary I should say. I didn't know the husband, Leanord I think his name is, is currently in jail serving 11 years for assaulting his girlfriend. They also said he is into heavy drugs too so it's really not surprising he'd commit this murder and bury his wife. And him to the list of slime.

Is that a tambourine I'm getting smacked with? :lol:

Yep. Well the smilies didn't give me a big selection of what to slap you with..:lol:

Is that a tambourine I'm getting smacked with? :lol:

*singing* Hey, Mr. Tambourine Man, play a song for me.... ;)

In all seriousness, though. Paul Flores is TOTALLY hiding something. Both him and his parents. I don't think we'll ever find out what really happened to Kristin Smart. It's really too sad.

You can just tell he seems like the type of person, not to offend anyone, but he seemed semi-********(in all seriousness) and he reminded me of that character I think Lenny from I forget the name of the book, catcher in the rye? maybe , I don't remember, the one who is big and dumb and gets angry and kills a mouse.

Of Mice and Men.......takes place on a ranch in California, had to study it in school.

As for guiltiness, I would have to go with Jule Caylor, I don't know, just something about his demeaner and the way he said it was 'peaceful' now that his wife was out of the house. I don't remember the exact words.

I said Sam Patel early on in this thread, but no one responded. Can I get a big "hell yeah" from anyone who agrees with me that this man is guilty? .

Hell yeah

Just rewatched this one for the first time in many years. the murdered woman's name was Joan Jeffries, I believe. You were right in your earlier post, everything points to Sam Patel. Some cases I'm split on, but the ones I mentioned for this list were the ones that I told myself out loud "this guy is guilty"

The one thing that doesn't point to Patel is his claim that the money from her insurance policy would either go to the family or charity. I wonder if that actually happened, though. The segment hinted that the motive for Patel killing Jeffries would be the insurance policy, but I don't know. Plus, wasn't her diamond necklace left behind? Possibly, Joan had some dirt on the company (it was in bad shape) and was about to expose it.

I really felt sad for the daughter, you could just tell she was really saddened by this, and understandably so.

Tim McClure

I can't believe nobody mentioned him --- he is the person suspected of killing his own mother. The case is on crystaldawn's UM Favorites volume 5. I hate to say this, but as my girlfriend and I were watching this segment, we were laughing by the end of it, his explanations had gotten so ludicrous. He is brazen -- I'll give him that.

There's somethign wrong with dude from the get-go. Firstly, he appears as himself in the reenactments, even though they deal with the murder of his mother, a supposedly traumatizing event for him. That's fishy right there. Secondly, in the segment, he also voluntarily (I suppose for the sake of accuracy?) donned a standard black tuxedo and wore WHITE TENNIS SHOES with it! I mean, I know the guy is a hillbilly, but really! Thirdly, he admits, as part of his alibi, to gambling in a casino alone for almost two hours --- on his wedding night!?!? While his wife gambled with her parents? I don't even know what to say to that.

Those, of course, prove nothing, I just find them strange and/or amusing. What I find laughably absurd, but which I think does prove alot, are his increasingly desperate explanations for obvious slip-ups. He told police that he was looking for his mother's purse as he drove around the weekend following her disappearance --- even though no one knew Terri McClure's purse was missing until her body was foudn on Monday. His explanation? Hi is sister put the idea in his head that someone could have commandeered his mother's car in an effort to steal her purse, and tossed it out by the side of the road after removing all of its relevant contents. Uh-huh.

Next, he carefully searched every casino parking lot in the area, except one --- guess which one it was. His explanation? He got "a feeling" it would be best if he didn't look there, to save his sanity. He has no problem reenacting the whole thing for Unsolved Mysteries, however.

Finally, he and his wife both volunteer to take polygraphs --- and they both fail miserably. Why? Well, he can only give the reasons why he failed, of course, but he says that there was so much time between the questions, and his eyes were closed, that he started thinking about what would happen if they thought he did it, and that made him nervous, and so he failed.

At some point, they'll find the gun he shot his mother with, covered in his fingerprints, wrapped in a typed and notarized confession produced on a typewriter he owned, signed by himself, and he'll say "Well, I was just thinking about how I would have killed my mother if I had done it, and I thought it would be interesting to type it out --- perhaps give police a guide to how the murder was done --- and of course I signed it because it was my original theory --- and I wrapped it in a gun I had, which, oddly enough [a favorite phrase of his], turned out to be the murder weapon, even though I have no idea how that could be."

I think this guy missed his true calling as a politician.

We've already said Paul Pollis, but I'm saying him again. Mainly because I love it when he comes out to play and spouts gibberish. :)

We've already said Paul Pollis, but I'm saying him again. Mainly because I love it when he comes out to play and spouts gibberish. :)

Is thay guy "joshmoe" really Paul Pollis? .I´m relatively new to the forum, so here is my question: Is it frequent for people directly involved in the cases(or some relatives) to post here?

It's questionable as to whether or not "joshmoe" is actually Paul Pollis. I tend to believe that it's him, based on the incoherentness (if that's a word) of his answers. It wouldn't make any sense for it to be anyone other than him. But that's just my opinion. :)

As for whether or not people directly involved in the cases post on the board, I'm actually surprised at the amount of people who have knowledge of the cases that DO post. We've seen posts from Lisa Kimmel's mom Sheila, and I want to say that Tami Leppart's sister posts on occasion as well. I know there are more, but those are the two that jump out at me immediately.

Thanks for that information LooksLikeCRicci. As a matter of fact, Bill Henderson´s grandson and Richard Aderson´s son, recently posted in the threads concerning their grandfather and father respectively.

I just saw the Susan Harrison case today. Someone mentioned that Jim Harrison seemed guilty and I agree 100%. He kept saying "She attacked me". Something about the way he kept saying that everything was her fault made him look even guiltier. He was trying to put the blame on her as if to justify something. They never found out who killed her.

Yeah, I'd agree that Jim Harrison is hiding something.

Is thay guy "joshmoe" really Paul Pollis? .I´m relatively new to the forum, so here is my question: Is it frequent for people directly involved in the cases(or some relatives) to post here?

I have sent copies of segments to many people whose friends or loved ones were profiled on UM and it never ceases to amaze me how many people involved in the segments read this board. Plus you get to hear a lot more info on the cases when you speak with them, things that UM has left out. I will also add that the co-worker in the Mary Morris' segment posted on here pretty regularly a few years ago and I had exchanged a few emails with him.

I will also add that the co-worker in the Mary Morris' segment posted on here pretty regularly a few years ago and I had exchanged a few emails with him.

You of course mean he liked to remind us of his innocence at every oppotunity. It's fine once or twice but annoying afterwards and besides everyone can see Mary Morris' husband (forget his name) had "guilty" written all over his face... so I shall add him to the list if no-one else has mentioned it.

I recently watched the Wendy Camp case on CD´s volume 5 collection and, although he has already been mentioned, I think Chad Mauer is one of the guiltiest person (along with his mother and grandmother) who has appeared on any UM segment. By the way, Has he (or any friend/relative) had posted before in this forum?

I recently watched the Wendy Camp case on CD´s volume 5 collection and, although he has already been mentioned, I think Chad Mauer is one of the guiltiest person (along with his mother and grandmother) who has appeared on any UM segment. By the way, Has he (or any friend/relative) had posted before in this forum?

I think you meant Chad Noe. Chad Maurer is an entirely different segment.

Yeah... isn't Chad Mauer the boy who worked in the bike shop that died under seriously questionable circumstances?

But in any case, Chad Noe appears quite guilty, at least in my opinion.

Yeah... isn't Chad Mauer the boy who worked in the bike shop that died under seriously questionable circumstances?

yup.

I think you meant Chad Noe. Chad Maurer is an entirely different segment.

Yes, you are correct wiseguy, I really meant Chad Noe not Chad Mauer (his segment is on CD´s volume 3) a very different case. Anyway Thanks for the correction.

Space Invaderz, cut the crap huh? Morris's husband was not guilty. Give me a break! I mean I know you and the prosecutor type are frustrated you cant find who did the crime and I know you are going crazy thinking of how you cannot manage to charge an innocent man with the crime but it wont work this time.

Mr. Morris does not compare to Mark Nichols or Stephen Marfeo or Chad Noe or Paul Pollis. Morris compares about as much to those guys as Geoge W. Bush compares to Franklin Roosevelt.

Space Invaderz, cut the crap huh? Morris's husband was not guilty. Give me a break! I mean I know you and the prosecutor type are frustrated you cant find who did the crime and I know you are going crazy thinking of how you cannot manage to charge an innocent man with the crime but it wont work this time.

Mr. Morris does not compare to Mark Nichols or Stephen Marfeo or Chad Noe or Paul Pollis. Morris compares about as much to those guys as Geoge W. Bush compares to Franklin Roosevelt.

You should cut the crap, yeh I lie awake at night planning my next move on this case :rolleyes:

That still doesnt answer my question.....

I think Chad Noe is one of the guiltiest person (along with his mother and grandmother) who has appeared on any UM segment. By the way, Has he (or any friend/relative) had posted before in this forum?

Not that I am aware of but Wendy Camp's sister did post on here a few months back and had a lot to say about the case.

That still doesnt answer my question.....

I don't know, kadrmas15; Mary Morris' husband seemed pretty guilty to me. He essentially has no answer for how it is that he completed a four minute telephone call to his wife --- after she was dead. Saying it rang over and over and that the phone company mysteriously registered it as a completed, 4 minute call is not an explanation --- it's a lie. Given that that was the best he could do, and has not attempted to offer another explanation, I think the police are quite right to consider him the #1 suspect in the case.

I'm not advocating guilt or innocence either way, but I do think that Mr. Morris' behavior is totally questionable. I find the cell phone call a bit fishy, although I wonder if police checked to see if he had left Mary a rambling 4 minute voicemail... but I don't think that would show up on a cellphone bill. *shaking head* I don't know.

I can also understand his initial reaction to be uncooperative, but I also fail to fully comprehend the logic behind it. If you aren't cooperative, you look suspicious. If you look suspicious, you're gonna get questioned. You know what I mean?

I need to see this segment again to weigh in fully...

That still doesnt answer my question.....

You never had a proper one.

I'm not advocating guilt or innocence either way, but I do think that Mr. Morris' behavior is totally questionable. I find the cell phone call a bit fishy, although I wonder if police checked to see if he had left Mary a rambling 4 minute voicemail... but I don't think that would show up on a cellphone bill. *shaking head* I don't know.

If Morris' husband had left a voice mail, why not just say so to begin with? Even if voicemails do show up as completed calls, that's an easily verifiable story for the police to check up on, and, had it checked out, it would have cleared him. The only explanation for not appealing to that as an explanation is that he did not leave a voicemail, but rather talked to somebody...

jeez o pete's kadrmas, take a chill pill. I can't speak for everyone, but I think I can speak for most everyone here when I say we're getting sick of you picking fights with everyone, and it seems like you have picked a fight with just about everyone here at one time or another. It's also a bad idea to state your opinions as facts. And you've done one or both of the two things I've mentioned in just about all of your last 10 or so posts. Also, you're constantly trying to pick fights with my friend, Space Invaderz, and it is really immature. Very immature.

Just to remind you, this is a forum about the Unsolved Mysteries program, which often talks about serious issues (murder, robbery, etc.) This is not the appropriate place to attack people's opinions. They are entitled to their own opinions as much as you are yours.

P.S. I am with the majority here when I say Mary Morris's husband is suspicious, so for you to say you know for sure he's innocent is, well, laughable.

Well lets put this in perspective. I think the issues we sometimes have on here and fights boil down to strong opinions about particular cases. That is certainly okay as diverse opinions are what fuel a message board. No one is right or wrong but lets just remember to respect everyone's opinion and not turn differences of opinions into arguments.

Well lets put this in perspective. I think the issues we sometimes have on here and fights boil down to strong opinions about particular cases. That is certainly okay as diverse opinions are what fuel a message board. No one is right or wrong but lets just remember to respect everyone's opinion and not turn differences of opinions into arguments.

Yeh well I dont particularly like being told to "cut the crap" for no real reason so you should be telling Kadrmas to back off.

Robert Weeks in my opinion., because I knew him, he killed so many and showed No guilt or Remorse. I feel that someone like this is the Guiltiest of all.

With regard to Mary Morris -

I'm not sure what all the bickering is about. I thought we established long ago that the crazy co-worker was behind this one, did we not? :D

LOL. I want to say that I started posting on the boards right at the end of that... :)

With regard to Mary Morris -

I'm not sure what all the bickering is about. I thought we established long ago that the crazy co-worker was behind this one, did we not? :D

That was still the funniest thing I've ever seen on this forum. I don't know if he was guilty or not, but after all his rambling posts in the long threads, he started a new one that basically said, "I'll offer a 25,000 reward for an arrest and conviction in this case, as long as it isn't me."

:lol: :lol:

I swear I had to read it three or four times to make sure I had it correct. I almost collapsed of a seizure of laughter.

No one had responded so I did, telling him it was maybe the funniest sentence ever written on the internet. Then Marry Morris' relatives PMed me telling me how much they enjoyed the post.

With regard to Mary Morris -

I'm not sure what all the bickering is about. I thought we established long ago that the crazy co-worker was behind this one, did we not? :D

Now you've invited him back!~


That was still the funniest thing I've ever seen on this forum. I don't know if he was guilty or not, but after all his rambling posts in the long threads, he started a new one that basically said, "I'll offer a 25,000 reward for an arrest and conviction in this case, as long as it isn't me."

:lol: :lol:

I swear I had to read it three or four times to make sure I had it correct. I almost collapsed of a seizure of laughter.

Yes I thought this was hilarious too :lol: I dunno what he was hoping for or how one of us could make a conviction. The guy is crazy but I still think the husband has alot to answer for.

I must have missed the "offering a reward" post. How very O.J. Simpson of him. Oh, well... digging through the threads I go... :)

I must have missed the "offering a reward" post. How very O.J. Simpson of him. Oh, well... digging through the threads I go... :)

I doubt you'll find much. Most of them were censored/removed.

I doubt you'll find much. Most of them were censored/removed.

Ok I'll take the bait re Mary Morris. I'll tell you something more and then I'm not posting to this thread further. From the last thread I started in the fall of 2005 I started conversing with someone else in private that had been posting. We Emailed, phoned, and Instant Messaged. She was working all over the world and invited me to join her. When she was in Newfoundland, Canada I flew up at her invitation. I was supposed to stay for a week. She had wanted me to have rough sex (my words) with her and leave her with bruises to certain parts of her body and scratched up, bleeding nipples. She picked me up at 4 AM at the airport and was already quite drunk.

Although I am against drinking and driving, that is not the purpose of this post. We spent a few hours together and then she passed out. When I woke up she asked me to leave saying I had too many issues with my wife, whom I was separating from. I won't go into details of the weekend but I am glad that I didn't do what she had wanted me to (leave the bruises etc.)

When I got home I spent several days of intense research. She had lied to me about many things - who she worked for and who her boss was. It turned out that this woman's supervisor was Laurie Gemmell, the last person to see Mary Morris alive and the blonde who appeared live on the UM show. They both worked for IBM as IT computer trainers. They had both been staying in the same apartment until a few days before I arrived. Then this woman moved downstairs and Laurie Gemmell left for the weekend just before I showed up.

Of course I was highly suspicious of all this and she would not give me any explanations when I confronted her with my findings. Remember the death threat that was left on my desk, and I don't think the show even mentioned it, but there were supposed to have been a bunch of writing left in computers about my coworkers to make it look like I wrote it. So I figured this was just one more setup. The police from Florida told me that the woman had told them I had "just showed up out of the blue" (in Newfounland). I figured that because Mary Morris had been beaten up they were trying to conspire to make it appear that I was that type of person and could show the police bruises etc.

I was asked not to say anything at the time but afer a year and a half later I don't think it makes much difference to the case. I would not set myself up for libel either and I have something like 200 pages of instant messaging to prove everything I have said. I am not giving these out, although 48 Hours Mysteries has a copy.

I may be wrong about Gemmell's motives here. I do know that she either lied about me on the show and others or was greatly misinformed. I put it down to Gemmell, alone or Mike Morris and Gemmell in a conspiracy. They both had access to the clinic via Mary and her keys and both would have known about the family gun. If Mary had been afraid of me, which she was not, do you think she would call me and tell me she has a gun in her car? There's more to it but apparently I annoy some of you so I better not offend anyone.

It's been almost seven years since this happened and still no charges filed. Say what you will but I won't respond back.

For those that have no clue what I am talking about read the other threads.

Ok I'll take the bait re Mary Morris. I'll tell you something more and then I'm not posting to this thread further. From the last thread I started in the fall of 2005 I started conversing with someone else in private that had been posting. We Emailed, phoned, and Instant Messaged. She was working all over the world and invited me to join her. When she was in Newfoundland, Canada I flew up at her invitation. I was supposed to stay for a week. She had wanted me to have rough sex (my words) with her and leave her with bruises to certain parts of her body and scratched up, bleeding nipples. She picked me up at 4 AM at the airport and was already quite drunk.

Sure man, sure....then your alarm clock woke you up :rolleyes:

Seriously....who is this guy? I mean, what is he on and who does he think he's fooling?

I moved the post to "Space Cadet re Mary Morris Murder". It is explained a bit better there. I realize that it is difficult for people to follow what I am talking about with not enough initial information and background. I apologise to all for that. I am the coworker that was portrayed on the UM segment about the Two Mary Morris Murders. Larie Gemmell appeared live on the show as Mary's friend. She has always been in in my face at every opportunity and media event with untruths about myself. The event described above (poorly, I know) was just one more incident of her involvement with me, years after the initial murders, still trying to possibly set me up. It looked that way to me once I found out how much deception was involved in luring me to another part of the world to leave bruises on a woman's body. The woman involved with Gemmell was known as "freakmagnet" who posted often on 2 other Mary Morris threads of this forum.

Freakmagnet lied to me about practically everything when there was no need to. Then her and Gemmell refused to give me any decent explanations after I uncovered the truth. Look at the other site if you are interested. People didn't beleive the hit man gone wrong theory and said it was just a coincidence. This could just be a coincidense also but it sure has had me wondering about it all from time to time. If you look at the Mary Morris thread from late fall of 2005 you can see my suspicions of freakmagnet even then. She did a pretty good job in fooling me - more than 200 pages of luring emails and instant messaging and some phone calls to the Phillipines, Florida and St. John's, Newfoundland. Then she told police in Florida that I had turned up out of the blue. Good thing I saved all the correspondence and put an end to the lies - at least for that time.

Dr. John Brannion is in my opinion also guilty. Although I think he hired someone to do it. He had an extramarital affair which his wife accepted, but I think he wanted to avoid the entire divorce hassle. He probably would have lost money and child custody. The whole BS story that he was framed because he was a prominent civil rights leader is bogus. The city of Chicago is not like a small rural town in Mississippi where black civil right leaders got killed by the KKK and local police. So the fact that he was a black panther is not a good excuse for the conspiracy theory. Furthermore, he wasen't really that big of a fish in the organization.

You'll have some serious 'splaining to do when kadrmas sees this, lol. :D

I'm on the fence about Brannion's guilt. I think it sucked how UM devoted most of the segment to proving that Brannion could not have had the time to shoot his wife, and yes, I am convinced that Brannon did NOT shoot his wife, but they barely touched on the possibility that he could have hired a hitman - a theory that would make all their time based analysis fly right out the window.

The prosecutor did say that he felt Brannion hired someone, but he offered no proof on the broadcast. If proof was offered at trial, it wasn't mentioned on UM. I've raised the issue before that his bank accounts should have been examined, but what do I know...

Haha, Justin well Iraq war party has no explaining to do. He has an opinion, he explained it very well, I dont even necessarily disagree with it. I think it is possible that Dr. Brannion did hire someone to kill his wife, I in my own opinion do not feel that Dr. Brannion himself physically murdered his wife. Hiring a hitman is very possible for him to have done. I am not convinced that is what happened but it is possible.

Yes, there have been some nasty confrontations on here, I have been involved in some, I have started some and I have put more fuel on the fire in other ones. However I wasnt involved, as far as I know in that one confrontation where a threat was made. I wasnt even aware there was an argument on here where one poster had threatened to kill another poster. Now that is truly insane.

I wasnt even aware there was an argument on here where one poster had threatened to kill another poster. Now that is truly insane.


Whaaaaat?! Apparently, you aren't the only one who's in the dark about that one. I'm guessing the thread came down as soon as the threat was made and the threatening party banned....

That IS insane, though.

Awsi Dooger's parting point --- that we're not likely to solve anything or discover much of anything new to the investigators on cases profiled by UM --- is probably accurate most of the time. They are paid professionals with access to witnesses, records, documents, etc. that we don't have. However, I think it is obviously possible for facts to come out that were not available to the UM watching public before (this happens all the time), and for theories to be advanced that were not advanced by the show that might be quite credible and account for apparent discrepancies in the cases as they are shown by UM.

And therein lies the counterpoint to Awsi Dooger: though rarely (if ever) are TRULY new facts presented here (things that would not have been known to law enforcement officials), new uses of those facts I think can arise from time to time. I mean, when you see on UM how apparently ready many police departments are to rely on psychics to give them theories about open cases, it's a pretty good indication that they are occasionally desperate for ideas. If psychics can contribute to an ongoing investigation, why not people assembling the facts in new ways? The board has great usefulness, therefore, to UM viewers, as it provides them with information not supplied by the show, and, wherever facts and intelligent, creative thinkers are present, there may occasionally even rise a theory of a crime or case that really ought to be pursued, if it hasn't, by law enforcement.

That said, if Awsi Dooger's last post was meant as a warning that, as a community, we ought not get too self-important, well, that is advice that internet message board communities would probably always do well to heed.

*sigh* I still miss Awsi, though. :(

Yes, CRicci I miss Awsi too. Well I think Awsi brought a lot to the forum, he had a lot to add on a lot of issues, very smart guy and opinionated as well. I see what you are saying wiseguy, and I even agree with the part you said about this forum, being an important one. I think most of the posters here have a lot to offer on the various cases in terms of their opinions, fresh eyes and ears can always uncover stuff on cases that may have been over looked.

I'm still maintaining hope that he'll be back. I don't see him as the type of guy that would just write off the forum, especially considering that he's written so many darn posts.

He was one of the few people who would post on here that would ACTUALLY make me laugh. Some of the stuff that he said was just priceless.

So, he left voluntarily then, and he wasn't banned? I thought he was given the ol' heave-ho.

It was a little weird to invalidate the entire forum as he did, but I have to say I'm not as bothered by off-topic posts as some. To me, after awhile, you sort of "get to know" the regulars on a message board, their personalities, interests, etc., and a little discussion of things that are not UM but are still of interest to everyone --- new movies, sports, whatever --- is warranted. I mean, I love UM, but, let's face it, there are a finite number of cases, and there aren't any more being added. Eventually, hoiw much more is there to say about Angela Hammond?

But, I guess that's why I don't run the board.

I think wiseguy really hit the proverbial nail on the head. This board is about the UM show. Period. I highly doubt anyone is here because they think that they are going to single-handily crack cases. It would be cool if we could, but hey, the cops are doing that, or at least trying to. That being said though, I think we collectively have come up with some rather impressive theories and ideas that the majority of people who watched the show back in the day probably didn't think about. And I'll admit that there have been theories proposed by some posters that have really changed my way of thinking with regard to certain cases, or that have given me insight and perspectives that I never would have had otherwise. Then there are the updates that Lifetime never gives us. There are the segments Lifetime never gives us (like the PSS) that we can talk about. There is also the occasional trading of DVDs with crystaldawn and others. I guess if all of that stuff is "worthless" so be it. But really, what are we here to do? What would make this board more worthwhile?

Sorry guys, if he said this board is "worthless", it was a pompous statement.

I highly doubt anyone is here because they think that they are going to single-handily crack cases.

Craaaap! Here I thought that I would FINALLY get to be the "someone out there that knows something" that Robert Stack always talked about.... way to shoot my dreams down, Justin! :lol:


Why do people LOVE this guy? :confused:

Coming from the perspective of an "Awsi fan," I can say that despite the tangents that he would go off on, he DID provide really interesting perspectives on SEVERAL cases, particularly those of Ted Binion, Kathy Hobbs, and D.B. Cooper. In addition, I did find some of his comments, although a bit off the wall, to be funny. Yes, his humor was at times irreverent, but I guess it didn't bother me. I suppose I've been "broken in" to all that-- I have friends who've said things 10 times worse.

In case you couldn't tell at this point, I am a fan of the occasional tangent. Given that the majority of the segments that we regularly discuss are as depressing as hell, it's nice to have an occasional laugh. I'm not accusing anyone of taking themselves too seriously or thinking that they are too important or ANYTHING like that.

Like Justin, I do feel that the posters on this board have contributed some really great theories and perspectives on several of the cases (Personally, I thought Kane7474's recent new take on the Angela Hammond case was pretty darn impressive, in addition to the new theory of the SuperGlue "inside job," although I can't remember who came up with that theory--sorry.) However, like Mozartpc, I also feel that if you post on here long enough, you get to learn some fun and interesting facts about our fellow posters that are just kinda slipped into their comments, and it's hard not to call them out on occasion.

Why do people LOVE this guy?

I don't know if I "loved" him, but I like smart posters, and he was one of them (there are many others, he was just one). I post on a few message boards, and smart posters always increase the quality of a board.

Honestly, why the whole drama if he goes or comes back? To put this in reality, this is just an internet message board, it not like it's his life or anything.... or is it? Right...? :lookaroun

I don't know why get all bent out of shape about it. If you go back and read those posts, he was politely asked to stay on topic, and instead of adhering to the request, he throws a hissyfit on his way out.

I have some questions re the 2nd Mary (Mcginnis) Morris murder and only as an objective viewer of UM and maybe other media.

Re. the 4 minute phone call. If we were to believe that the phone rang and rang for 4 minutes with nobody answering there could still be some questions asked.

"Investigators also had questions for Mike Morris, Mary's husband. Morris claimed he was at the movies with his daughter at the time of the murder." This is the quote directly from the UM show.

If they were at the movies at the time of the murder did he just decide to get up and leave the movie to call his wife? Cell phones are supposed to be turned off during movies. There is a request at the beginning for people to do that. So why would he be concerned enough to leave a movie to call her? If he was so concerned that he would have to leave would he even be at the movies to begin with?

I have some questions re the 2nd Mary (Mcginnis) Morris murder and only as an objective viewer of UM and maybe other media.

Re. the 4 minute phone call. If we were to believe that the phone rang and rang for 4 minutes with nobody answering there could still be some questions asked.

"Investigators also had questions for Mike Morris, Mary's husband. Morris claimed he was at the movies with his daughter at the time of the murder." This is the quote directly from the UM show.

If they were at the movies at the time of the murder did he just decide to get up and leave the movie to call his wife? Cell phones are supposed to be turned off during movies. There is a request at the beginning for people to do that. So why would he be concerned enough to leave a movie to call her? If he was so concerned that he would have to leave would he even be at the movies to begin with?

Havent you already been told not to talk about this around here? Let it go!

Honestly, why the whole drama if he goes or comes back? To put this in reality, this is just an internet message board, it not like it's his life or anything.... or is it? Right...? :lookaroun

Would a hit man stick around for 2 hours after a 911 call for conversation? There was supposed to be a 2 hour gap between the 911 call and the time Mike Morris called his wife and said he let it ring for 4 minutes.

Yeah... I was going to say that since the thread has been locked and because it sounds to me like an investigation is still ongoing...we probably shouldn't talk about it anymore. I, for one, would not want to interfere in any sort of police investigation, so I'm not going to comment on it anymore. We'd probably all be wise to follow the suggestions of Crystaldawn, TJ, and the police.

...and Space Invaderz... the cat bowling seriously slays me. I grin everytime I see your pic. :)

Well I still hope Awsi comes back. I think some people just got it wrong on Awsi and that is because I feel they dont understand him. I dont believe Awsi to be arrogant or think he knows it all. Awsi is clearly a smart guy and he is very confident and very politically incorrect and as a result some people do not like him.

Did Awsi go over the top sometimes? Sure, a lot of people on this board have gone over the top in one way or another on something. Awsi was a colorful character, wasnt afraid to say what he thought and wasnt politically correct, so some people dont like him and that is really a shame.

I do not think Awsi ever intended to offend people or cause harm or whatever. Awsi just is not afraid to say what he thinks is all and sometimes people took what he said out of context and took things that he said the wrong way.

Well I am glad we agree mostly on this. Well I agree no one will be liked by everyone, or most people wont be liked by everyone anyway. I certainly know what it is like, not to be liked, although I am not sure people dislike me as much as they dislike some of my antics and that is understandable. I certainly have gone way over the top at various times and it is wrong, I get hot headed, sometimes I do not thinks out and people take offense to that.

I feel kind of like Awsi in a way, in terms of being mis understood, of people not liking the fact I am not politically correct. However I hope Awsi comes back, he brought a lot to the forum, regardless of how many times he went off topic, I feel he brought spunk to the board.

Yeah... I was going to say that since the thread has been locked and because it sounds to me like an investigation is still ongoing...we probably shouldn't talk about it anymore. I, for one, would not want to interfere in any sort of police investigation, so I'm not going to comment on it anymore. We'd probably all be wise to follow the suggestions of Crystaldawn, TJ, and the police.

...and Space Invaderz... the cat bowling seriously slays me. I grin everytime I see your pic. :)

I appreciate your comments SI and Cricci, but in Koala's defense he did ask permission to post that one comment and I did agree. The comment he made wouldn't really affect the police investigation and is just posing a few questions. :)

hopefully he picked up a strike or at least a spare. :D

Hell, he could probably pick up a 7-10 split with that thing. :lol:

Oh he's cat bowling? I wondered what form of animal cruelty was happening there! Great pic, love it, makes me laugh even though I'm a crazy cat lady!

...and Space Invaderz... the cat bowling seriously slays me. I grin everytime I see your pic. :)

hopefully he picked up a strike or at least a spare. :D

Hell, he could probably pick up a 7-10 split with that thing. :lol:

:clap Justin

If you hate cats like I do, this pic is hilarious :lol:

That was still the funniest thing I've ever seen on this forum. I don't know if he was guilty or not, but after all his rambling posts in the long threads, he started a new one that basically said, "I'll offer a 25,000 reward for an arrest and conviction in this case, as long as it isn't me."

:lol: :lol:

I swear I had to read it three or four times to make sure I had it correct. I almost collapsed of a seizure of laughter.

No one had responded so I did, telling him it was maybe the funniest sentence ever written on the internet. Then Marry Morris' relatives PMed me telling me how much they enjoyed the post.

I think you can all relax about Awsi as he is likely doing undercover work trying to collect a reward. He took a genuine interest in cases and would not want his interest in the forum interfering with his work at this time.

I think you can all relax about Awsi as he is likely doing undercover work trying to collect a reward. He took a genuine interest in cases and would not want his interest in the forum interfering with his work at this time.


Interesting. Why do you think that?

Awsi would like it that way. He did take a 3 week sabbatical from the forum before this time off. :lol: ;)

Speaking of avatars, who are those people in your new avatar, crystaldawn?

Speaking of avatars, who are those people in your new avatar, crystaldawn?

I thought that might stump some of you. :) Anybody have any guess who it is?

I thought that might stump some of you. :) Anybody have any guess who it is?


I think that the couple in your avatar CD, appeared on a segment from Special#4, the first UM episode hosted by Robert Stack. Although I don´t remember the couple´s last name, the case involved the discovery of a human skull, suspected to be that of the husband, who disappeared with his wife on a Grand Canyon rafting trip in the late 1920´s (I think 1928). Is that correct crystaldawn?

I think that the couple in your avatar CD, appeared on a segment from Special#4, the first UM episode hosted by Robert Stack. Although I don´t remember the couple´s last name, the case involved the discovery of a human skull, suspected to be that of the husband, who disappeared with his wife on a Grand Canyon rafting trip in the late 1920´s (I think 1928). Is that correct crystaldawn?

Yes, very good philipscurve! Its Glenn and Bessie Hyde. :)

I thought that might stump some of you. :) Anybody have any guess who it is?

That is tough, mainly because I don't remember any picture of them in the segment. The earlier ones tended to do that, we didn't see a picture of Glen Consagra's (or his cronies) victims: Fred and Mary Lou. Maybe the pic was in the segment.

At first glance I thought it was Amelia Earhart and her co-pilot, I couldn't quite see the faces. I would have been wrong, though.

I was just kidding from the start. Of course, it is unlikely and untrue. That is why I posted with a wink and a LOL icon. It was merely an attempt at some humor playing on some truths IE he did take some time off (I think I read that in one of his posts in May - 3 weeks and then he returned to the board so this time off is not the first). It is also a play on the speculations and long comments about his absence from this board since his last post I find it somewhat entertaining and interesting that a lot of folks here have such an interest in his absence. I am quite sure that many of you have pm'd Awsi and know why he is not posting. The other part of the humor (for myself) is that people are saying I am crazy. Those that would get it, that it was only an attempt at humor, would get it. Those that don't would think- yup. He must be crazy - inventing scenarios in his mind.

I was going to add that the first new UM segment was already being tentatively planned and so the petition to bring back UM was not really needed. The new producers had taken such an interest in his disappearance that the show was indeed being rejuvenated with the new pilot being - "What really happened to Awsi Dooger"

My humor is sometimes of a dry nature. Sometimes I incorporate some truth into it to make it both plausible and hopefully humorous. I don't spend a lot of time working at it. Maybe someone did get that it was only humor.

I don't mean to take any cracks at anyone for not understanding or the manner in which anyone posts or communicates by explaining this. You would not know whether I was serious or it was an attempt at hidden humor unless I had posted here more in the past and you got to know me.

I find the "crazy coworker" idea quite humorous and so it was a play on that too. Of course, I know that would be "crazy talk". That is what I do for humor at many times. Sometimes, people will shake their heads (people that know me) and sometimes they will all find my humor stimulating and humorous. They usually know when I am kidding, though.

I don't know Awsi Dooger but in reading through some of his posts I get the impression that he has "a wild and crazy guy" type of personality in that he likes to evoke stimulation, controversy and a mixture of facts in his posts. He obviously achieves his goals. That is why he has evoked so much comment and specualtion from many here. He does have a sense of humor and that is probably one of the reasons he enjoys posting here. Not everyone understands where he comes from all the time with his comments. Did Awsi really state that the forum is worthless?

My refined top 10 list for guiltiest people in the history of UM in no particular order:

Paul Pollis
The late Stephen Marfeo
Mark Nichols
Judy Groezinger
Donnie Hansen
Jule Caylor
Wayne Hecker
Mike Reimer
Rob Page
Jim Harrison

Ohhh... Jim Harrison. TOTALLY.

I just re-watched this segment. He really doesn't come off well, does he?

Ohhh... Jim Harrison. TOTALLY.

I just re-watched this segment. He really doesn't come off well, does he?

No, he certainly didn't come off very well at all. I'll place this guy not only in my top 10 guiltiest, but also in my top 10 least favorite. I know I've talked about my disgust for him before, but it just burns me how he channels his innermost Jule Caylor by talking about how "bad" Susan was.

It's interesting to note how he doesn't have any answer for how he failed 2 polygraph tests, or how Susan "coincidentally" disappeared on the day she left him for good, or all of the abuse she suffered, some of which her youngest son witnessed. But he is very QUICK to point out how Susan used "foul language" :rolleyes:

There's no doubt in my mind Susan was ready to live a good life without Jim, and with her sons and business, but Jim Harrison cut it down.

This is what people are overlooking. I rarely post, but I have lurked these boards for about 2 years. The death of a famous actress inspired me to do my first post on SO. The man got away with alot of stuff in the board. You thought the joke about tammy lynn leppert as a mudwrestler was funny? Especially with her sister posting here. Congradulations you have visited 50 states and are a "Big Shot Vegas Gambler", what the hell does that have to do with Unsolved Mysteries? It's great you like provocative photos of women, but how many avatars and nude links do we need? There are plenty of outlets for that. Also why did he get pissed that a banned poster's racial slurs weren't distributed around? I don't need to see racial slurs. As I said just by lurking, I have seen moderators Seth, Brain Damage and Pavanbadal remove posts and avatars for less severe infractions then Dooger. Why do people LOVE this guy? :confused:

Remarkable experience tonight, directed to this thread by a friend on another forum. He mentioned UM yesterday and I told him about this forum, that it was very good with plenty of sharp members and I've posted on it for years, but not recently. Then 3 hours ago I receive a wild PM, saying he just read my "obituary" here, accompanied by plenty of psychoanalysis, and debate on my contributions or lack of same.

My last post is here. In its entirety. Late May. There was nothing deleted. No comment about a worthless forum. It was also no big deal. I have more heated disputes in sportsbooks, almost daily. But kudos for filling a page or two with speculative fluff. Not DB Cooper-like, but a parallel approach. As in straight down. Where's Popeye Doyle when you need him? :lol:

In late May the Frontier announced it was closing on July 15th. That hotel was a major client for the sports statistical company I work for. I had to scramble throughout June to find a replacement(s). My posts were AWOL here and virtually everywhere. After that exhaustion and stress, I believe it was called a vacation. Similar to previous years. Maybe 30 rounds of golf. Losing tickets at Saratoga. Cherished time with aging and infirm parents. Trivia like that.

Then when I return in September it turns out I have days to pack up and relocate. Fun stuff. I'm still not totally settled:

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=7024353

Now let me turn to Old School TV's interesting summation, which prompted this post. Let's put it this way, when you condemn someone in print a basic priority is to use your examples for max benefit, seizing your best ammo.

:rofl:

I joked about Tammy Lynn Leppert as a mudwrestler? A joke her sister had reason to take offense to? Are you sure about that? Really sure, or were you just desperately looking for reason to rip me, and it impaired an ability to read/comprehend? Here, how about a sentence this board will recognize; would you like to make a little wager, let's say the entire dollarly worth of this planet against one cheeseless Whopper? I'd have much the best of it.

Let's examine that exchange. Here's the related post from Tammy's sister:

Hi
They say she was Tess in Spring Break.I don't know.She is the blond knocking out some guy in the ring either in spring break or little darlings.I believe she was an extra.Starting out in the movies.

suzanne

Now here's my response:

Sounds like a charming scene. Thanks for reminding me why I never watched Scarface or anything similar.

But I did see Spring Break. I don't remember a boxing scene but there was mud wrestling in a night spot so Tammy could have been in that scene and knocked someone out of the ring.

Now that's a weak joke, even by my standards. Her sister says she knocked out someone in the ring. I reply that I saw Spring Break and it included a mudwrestling scene. I speculate that could have been the scene, the one she knocked someone out of the ring. I guess I could be criticized for writing "out of the ring" instead of "in the ring." It was a helpful comment, trying to isolate the exact scene Tammy had appeared in Spring Break.

***

The one link I posted to a side view of Keeley Hazell was a mistake. I apologized in a subsequent thread. Old School TV predictably writes links, which is wrong. I'm certainly not apologizing for my avatars. Maybe Resurrection Mary but that was short lived.

BTW, I think CRicci appeared in an avatar wearing a bikini, sipping bubbly. And that picture was taken minutes before she dominated a cherry popsicle bar. Such outlandish transgressions on this board.

Now to Old School TV's other specific example, denouncing me. I must say, parrying this one this isn't even an energetic workout. About as challenging as picking between Seattle Slew and Mr. Ed going a flat mile. At least in sportsbooks or on other forums I can be rightfully ridiculed for faulty speculation. My gosh, make an effort.

Here's the quote, which is included in its entirety above this War and Peace reply:

"Also why did he get pissed that a banned poster's racial slurs weren't distributed around? I don't need to see racial slurs."

Wow. Let's go back to that thread, which was about Space Invaderz' edible avatar: http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=195969

I made a comment that Ignore was for wimps. I left for hours. BibleCode apparently replied with slurs and was banned, before I returned. Nothing I posted was deleted from that thread. And here's the related comments I made, the ones Old School TV objected to, using the elegant term "pissed":

That thread is locked, so I can't quote and paste. But here are my responses after BibleCode was banned due to the slurs:

***

"Well, I notice BibleCode and his classy biblical language may not be able to respond to this, but here's the thing about ignore: Forums like this are multifaceted. Serious threads and lighthearted threads. Varied topics and themes. If you dismiss someone to ignore you miss everything. The poster could be a riot in certain threads and very astute in others, but merely disagree with you on one or two heated cases. I've seen that emotionally used as an excuse to ignore someone many times. Plus, the ignore function, at it's worst, is often used in taunting, as in, "I'm putting you on ignore and if other posters are smart they'll do the same thing." I've seen stuff like that frequently on other forums.

In the case of an avatar, ignore makes even less sense because avatars are often short lived, and that has been demonstrated in the case of Space Invaderz."

***

At that point, AVERMAN asks,

"Just curious, why was BibleCode banned?"

My reply, in the next post:

***

"I don't know, but I remember he had a heated exchange with dynoguy a few days ago. Seemed to have a tendency to throw in an unnecessary jab at the end of his posts that redirected it as personal instead of a discussion of the issue."

***

This is my next post in that thread:

***

"Usenet newsgroups are definitely a different breed. I wasn't referring to them with my wimp remark. Unmoderated forums like that are magnets for jerks who thrill to disrupt. They know they would be banned elsewhere. I only post on one currently, a Miami Dolphins group. There have been several pure disruptors on that group, extremely lewd and never a threat of a productive post. One guy would start thread after thread with nothing but antisemitic remarks about a recent Dolphin quarterback. Sometimes those guys start 20 consecutive identical threads just to hog the forum. I've never put them on ignore but could certainly understand anyone who did.

That doesn't apply here and IMO the more liberal use of ignore on a message board, the worse the board becomes. Two months ago on one political site I post on the administrators experimented with an extreme form of ignore, called the block function. You could block anyone from responding to your posts, or even threads you started. That led to the predictable abuse. Some paranoid posters were putting dozens of people on block, the ones who always disagreed with them. Then they started threads with the familiar opinions and plenty of blatant misinformation, knowing that suddenly the people who always corrected the flaws were not allowed to particapte. And that led to parallel threads from the blocked posters, responding to the threads they were blocked from. It was absurd unproductive chaos. Many prominent members stopped posting but the people who always taunted with ignore were in heaven, bragging about how many people they had blocked. Luckily sanity prevailed after about two weeks and the block function was eliminated."

***

At that point Ireneparalegal and Janice ended the speculation by informing us in the thread that BibleCode used racial slurs in his reply and was properly banned. This was my response:

***

"Okay, that explains it. Thanks for clarifying, Ireneparalegal. I was gone last night and must have missed it in the interim. The post was apparently removed since I just checked BibleCode's posts and nothing like that appears.

Well, FWIW he did make one of the most obscure references in the history of this forum, the low blows in the Duran/Buchanon fight."

***

And my last substantive post in that thread, other than a little off-topic (so sorry) back and forth with SiberianKiss at the end:

***

"I don't get it. jeeps and wiseguy182 were the only ones to address the cliquey aspect, expressing surprise and not outrage or being offended. That would have been my reaction also. I post on boards with definite cliques and this board doesn't resemble them at all. There aren't many active posters here, for one thing. Cliques imply restriction and exclusion and I certainly don't detect that.

I also don't see the runaway laughter at Space Invaderz' avatar. Many posters in this thread have said it is odd but doesn't cross the line. I definitely agree. Maybe girls shouldn't be allowed to eat ice cream in public, if it has such obvious sexual correlation."

***

What type of bizarre slanted analysis does it take to twist that into, "...pissed that a banned poster's racial slurs weren't distributed around?"

I never came back to the topic in a different thread.

Old School TV predictably bashed SiberianKiss in a post today, plus a jab toward myself.

That's another one I'd love to wager on, SiberianKiss vs. Old School TV. Remember that USC/Stanford game a few weeks ago? Ouch. Comparing Old School TV and SiberianKiss, I'll gladly give 40 points. Just not on the football field. A bit more basic. And already plenty of evidence.

That may have been personal but it's warranted. You just made me waste 45 minutes when I could have been researching my (daily) losing hockey picks.

Next. . .

How about you guys take this to PM or e-mail so the rest of us don't need to read the non-UM banter?

Most of us could not care less about this personal junk.

Thank you. :D

I completely agree with Todd Mueller that this conversation is best kept to a pm or email. You've both had a chance to "defend" your comments on the board so anything else that needs to be said needs to be said in private or the posts will be deleted.

I support Awsi and what he said, welcome back Awsi!

here's another gem from your hero, staunchly supporting Siberiankiss here, who makes discrimintory remarks against bikers, and lesbians, and wishes for his coworkers to get robbed.

:wallbang :wallbang :wallbang

I still think you rock, though, Wiseguy. :) It just may be letter if we let this dead horse rest. :)

(I'm bummed, though! I was looking for the animation of the smilies beating a dead horse that I think Justin may have used a few weeks back. Did I imagine this ingenious graphic, or was it removed?)

:wallbang :wallbang :wallbang

I still think you rock, though, Wiseguy. :) It just may be letter if we let this dead horse rest. :)

(I'm bummed, though! I was looking for the animation of the smilies beating a dead horse that I think Justin may have used a few weeks back. Did I imagine this ingenious graphic, or was it removed?)
Nope, I remember seeing that animated smily, beating the dead horse. I think there was even some small flies thrown in the animation or maybe I'm still feeling the effects of yesterday's cheap champagne buzz. Perhaps PETA succesfully petitionned the board to remove it? ;-)

I hope ed carter from the bordello murders was mentioned somewhere on here.

Chad Noe has to be the most guiltiest person I have ever seen on UM. His Mom and bitchy grandma Ida are accesories. Chad's Mom chose not to participate and that was very smart of her. Chad and Ida made themselves look more guilty.

1) Why change your mind about Wendy seeing her son after repeatedly not allowing her to?? Why pick her up and take her to her son??? Why not just bring the son to her house??? They could have even made Wendy's husband leave if they felt he was molesting the child.

2) Wendy called her husband twice that day. If Beverly dropped her off at Walmart, Why would Wendy not immediately call her husband again???

3) Three people stranded at a Wal-Mart. Someone would have seen that especially since Wendy has MS and probably would have called her husband and then went into Walmart and sat down.

4) Chad bragging about killing them in a drunken state but claims he didn't. NO ONE WOULD DO THAT. Drinking brings out the truth sometimes and I think that is what happened her.

Also, I think it is terrible that Chad left her because she had MS. We now know that Grandma Ida and Beverly have been convicted of other crimes.

Grandma Ida, Maybe the reason Wendy was "bitching and moaning" is because she was not getting to see her kid. The poor woman already has MS, her husband left her and know you will not let her see her kid. I would be bitching and moaning too.

This family is pure evil. What are the chances that Chad would randomly call her about a visit and then Beverly drops off the three people and Walmart and they are murdered by someone else??? NONE. Chad Noe killed Wendy Camp and family.

Chad Noe has to be the most guiltiest person I have ever seen on UM. His Mom and bitchy grandma Ida are accesories. Chad's Mom chose not to participate and that was very smart of her. Chad and Ida made themselves look more guilty.

1) Why change your mind about Wendy seeing her son after repeatedly not allowing her to?? Why pick her up and take her to her son??? Why not just bring the son to her house??? They could have even made Wendy's husband leave if they felt he was molesting the child.

2) Wendy called her husband twice that day. If Beverly dropped her off at Walmart, Why would Wendy not immediately call her husband again???

3) Three people stranded at a Wal-Mart. Someone would have seen that especially since Wendy has MS and probably would have called her husband and then went into Walmart and sat down.

4) Chad bragging about killing them in a drunken state but claims he didn't. NO ONE WOULD DO THAT. Drinking brings out the truth sometimes and I think that is what happened her.

Also, I think it is terrible that Chad left her because she had MS. We now know that Grandma Ida and Beverly have been convicted of other crimes.

Grandma Ida, Maybe the reason Wendy was "bitching and moaning" is because she was not getting to see her kid. The poor woman already has MS, her husband left her and know you will not let her see her kid. I would be bitching and moaning too.

This family is pure evil. What are the chances that Chad would randomly call her about a visit and then Beverly drops off the three people and Walmart and they are murdered by someone else??? NONE. Chad Noe killed Wendy Camp and family.


That bunch just makes me sick. I cannot watch the UM segment cause it just makes my blood boil listening to that family.

That bunch just makes me sick. I cannot watch the UM segment cause it just makes my blood boil listening to that family.
What makes me so mad is that the family shows no concern for the missing people. If they are innocent as they say, then aren't you worried about the missing people. Grandma Ida is still trashing Wendy even though she is missing.

1) Don Sherman: looked pretty happy his wife was gone.

2) Jay Morris: did a better acting job than Don Sherman, but his short phone call to his wife's cell right about the time his wife was being killed, is a dead give away. (I am referring to the "Two Mary Murders" episode). Also the innocent Mary morris had her wedding ring taken when she was killed. This is definitely a contract hit job. It's quite sad that his hitman got the wrong Mary the first time.

3) I can't remember names, but it was the case where the two young adults were playing the card game "Magic" at a friend's house. After they left, they went parking and ended up being stabbed to death. At any rate, it turns out the murdered man had a girlfriend/wife at the time who he was apparently cheating on. He turns up dead and she collects on his life insurance. She didn't seem too sad he was gone.

I am sure there are others I am forgetting, but these 3 stand out off the top of my head.

3) I can't remember names, but it was the case where the two young adults were playing the card game "Magic" at a friend's house. After they left, they went parking and ended up being stabbed to death. At any rate, it turns out the murdered man had a girlfriend/wife at the time who he was apparently cheating on. He turns up dead and she collects on his life insurance. She didn't seem too sad he was gone.

The couple's names were Michael Johnston and Rochelle Robinson. I wonder if this one's been solved. I haven't watched this segment in a long time so I'll have to re-watch it to see the girlfriend/wife's reaction to the guy's death.

I don't know if these have been mentioned or not but:

1. Steve Page, who killed his wife in Vidor,Tx and changed his story several times to make his story match the evidence and to this day has yet to be arrested. There is actually a billboard on the highway that says "You can get away with murder in Vidor,Tx." and has pictures of his wife and him on there. Her family had it put up. Steve also has alot of friends in the Vidor Police Department

2. Chad Noe and his hillbilly family are guilty as sin. No need to go into why. It has been documented numerous times.

Mark Nichols
-Rob Page
-Steve Marfeo
-Chad Noe
-Paul Pollis
Sorry, Wiseguy, but this one is TOO easy for me, Paul Pollis. First off, he ran and hid on the day his polygraph was scheduled, but for me here is what made him the guiltiest person on UM, his interview with UM, he was smirking and he was VERY VERY defensive at times, when questioned on the shed, he said, "it's a shed, normal everyday garden tools," BUT for me the topper of his guilt was when they talked about all the cleaning, that is suspicious itself, but then Paul said THIS statement, "I clean, i live there, I like to live in a CLEAN house" that statement was VERY suspicious and in my view also very cocky, and here are other canadiates for you Sam Patel, but don't forget about Mr. harrison, the ex husband of Susan Harrison.

I skimmed all 9 pages of this thread and was surprised to see that no one mentioned Robert "Bob" Hall, the ex-con who ran over his wife (Kay Hall) following a disagreement at a country club dinner party and then had the COJONES to invite UM to film a segment on the case in order to "clear his name." He was later convicted, although the half-assed UM update (it didn't even begin with Stack's signature declaration of "UPDATE!") didn't explain if any additional evidence turned up to secure that conviction. To me, Bob Hall is topped only by Tim McClure in the brazenness department.

I skimmed all 9 pages of this thread and was surprised to see that no one mentioned Robert "Bob" Hall, the ex-con who ran over his wife (Kay Hall) following a disagreement at a country club dinner party and then had the COJONES to invite UM to film a segment on the case in order to "clear his name." He was later convicted, although the half-assed UM update (it didn't even begin with Stack's signature declaration of "UPDATE!") didn't explain if any additional evidence turned up to secure that conviction. To me, Bob Hall is topped only by Tim McClure in the brazenness department.

I think that's why he was omitted, because he admitted guilt to serve a lesser sentence, or something like that (help me out guys).

"I LIKE A CLEAN HOUSE" :mad:

Can't these idiots just be put in jail?

By the way, the easiest one was Mark Nichols. He just looked guilty and put no effort into trying.

I thought Robert Salazar but the jury disagreed with me.

I thought Robert Salazar but the jury disagreed with me.

Absolutely; it was terrible that he was acquitted. I believe Jeremy Witherell was guilty as well.

I think Ted Loseff's wife hired people to murder him. Then there is Don Sherman with his missing wife's skull being found outside of his favorite restaurant, right before he was getting married to someone else. :rolleyes:

No mentions for Wayne Hecker? Something totally phony about that clown.

"I don't owe anyone any explanation but the Lord"

Please. :rolleyes:

I have tons of UM segments on tape, and it's always intriguing trying to figure out whether or not someone claiming innocence is actually guilty. Of course, as many people have already stated, there are the obviouses, such as Chad Noe, Paul Pollis, Dub Wackerhagen, just to name a few.

I know that I'm definitely not part of a majority on this one (and I don't need people to constantly remind me of that), but through several viewings of the segment over a period of years, I have to honestly admit that I'm very much on the fence about Jule Caylor. Don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible that he's guilty, he's definitely NOT the nicest guy you'll ever meet, and he probably deserves a good spanking or two for his uncaring attitude towards his missing wife, but if you really, really watch the segment closely, there really aren't a lot of rock-solid circumstances that point to him being the killer, either. What I think probably happened (and remember, it's just my opinion) is that, after suffering through an unhappy relationship for so many years, Dottie Caylor started getting involved in all of those things that she wanted to keep secret from Jule, and her leaving on the train was her "ride out of Concord and into a new and better life." Because of the fact, however, that she had agoraphobia, she had very little experience being on her own out in public, which means that she was probably very scared and vulnerable. I think she probably crossed paths with a stranger who was able to pick up on these things about her and couldn't resist such an easy target. Once again, just my thoughts. There's probably a decent chance that I'm wrong.

I'm probably going to start a new thread that examines the circumstances against several people whose guilt or innocence has been called into question, and I'd certainly like to know what other people think.

I have another one, Don Dixon, Mr. "There are no exit wounds!" from the Eric Tamiyasu case. Hell, choose ANYONE from that case. Sheriff Wampum, Eric's date, they were all in on it if you ask me.

Just curious about something, RightOnDude. I've seen this segment many times, and for the most part, I tend to agree with what most people say. I think that sheriff Wampler is an awful scumbag, I'm inclined to believe that Don Dixon was somehow involved, and I'm on the fence about Eric Smith, but what makes you think that Eric Tamiyasu's girlfriend was involved? That seems kind of unusual (to me, anyway).

I know that I'm definitely not part of a majority on this one (and I don't need people to constantly remind me of that), but through several viewings of the segment over a period of years, I have to honestly admit that I'm very much on the fence about Jule Caylor. Don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible that he's guilty, he's definitely NOT the nicest guy you'll ever meet, and he probably deserves a good spanking or two for his uncaring attitude towards his missing wife, but if you really, really watch the segment closely, there really aren't a lot of rock-solid circumstances that point to him being the killer, either. What I think probably happened (and remember, it's just my opinion) is that, after suffering through an unhappy relationship for so many years, Dottie Caylor started getting involved in all of those things that she wanted to keep secret from Jule, and her leaving on the train was her "ride out of Concord and into a new and better life." Because of the fact, however, that she had agoraphobia, she had very little experience being on her own out in public, which means that she was probably very scared and vulnerable. I think she probably crossed paths with a stranger who was able to pick up on these things about her and couldn't resist such an easy target. Once again, just my thoughts. There's probably a decent chance that I'm wrong.

I agree. Plus, Jule said something recently in an article that I agree with: "Being that she's managed to successfully hide herself for 25 years, I don't have any reason to believe she will reveal her whereabouts any time soon." We have to remember that Dottie is a person that didn't enjoy being out in public and preferred to remain secluded in her home, so if she is still alive, she is probably in hiding somewhere not wanting to reveal her whereabouts.

I have never seen the Salazar case so I cannot comment. Jeremy Witherall, to be honest, I have never really been sure of his guilt. He was acquitted, so to me, that is done. However just because he had a turbulent marriage hardly means he for sure killed his wife and tried to stage it as a suicide by throwing her over a balcony. The biggest problem with that case was simple.

If the authorities were so convinced in their case, why wait what was it 7 or 8 years before charging him? I mean, if I am a detective and I think I got a case that is even remotely provable the one thing I do not do is let a guy that I think is a murderer walk the streets for 7 or 8 years. It is because the cops and prosecutors thought their case was weak and rightfully so. They were afraid of an acquittal that is why they did not charge him earlier. MY guess is the only reason why he was even charged at all was because Jeremy's wife, her family would not leave the cops and prosecutors alone and so finally they decided to seek a grand jury indictment and you could indict a ham sandwich, that is how easy it is to get that.

In terms of 'guiltiest' people, gosh there are several. Among my favorites are Michael Haim, Steve Page, Mark Nichols, Jim Harrison, Wilda Loseff just to name a few. There are many more I am forgetting but those are a few. Also Ted Binion's girlfriend and Rick Tabish. Yeah, they killed him. They were convicted at trial but they both got new trials and were acquitted of murder and other major charges at the retrial although I believe both were convicted of fraud at retrial again for forging Ted Binion's signature on various things and Tabish was also convicted again at retrial of burglary and grand theft but he too was acquitted of the big charge which was murder. That was mainly due to cops and prosecutors bungling the case.

Even though I am hard on juries sometimes, they cannot always be blamed whether it is a conviction or an acquittal. Often these mistakes happen one way or the other because the jury for legal reasons or due to arrogance or incompetence on the parts of prosecutors or defense attorney's are not allowed to hear all the facts. Like Rick Tabish and Binion's girlfriend, both were convicted and originally sentenced to life in prison. What did this was Tabish and Sandra Murphy, Binion's girlfriend were tried together when they should have been tried separate (the same reason I predict O.J. Simpson and C.J. Stewart will eventually be given new trials). Murphy was originally sentenced to 22 years to life and Tabish was sentenced to 25 years to life. In Nevada, if a defendant is convicted of first degree murder at trial, the jury determines the sentence. They can sentence someone to either death, LWOP or 20 years to life.

At re-trial Murphy and Tabish were both acquitted of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. However Murphy and Tabish were both convicted of burglary and grand larceny and Tabish was also convicted of assault with a deadly weapon. Murphy who by the time of the retrial had been in custody for over 5 and a half years was sentenced to time served and released. Tabish was originally sentenced to 2 to 20 years in prison on the burglary and grand larceny charges (1 to 10 years each to run consecutively) as well as 1 and a half to 5 years for assault with a deadly weapon to run consecutively for a grand total of 3 and a half to 25 years in prison. Tabish was denied parole several times. However earlier this year he was granted parole by the Nevada parole board and is due to be released later this year.

I would love to know WHY Salazar's jury acquitted him. I could never wrap my brain around that.

Okay, I looked up Salazar's case. To be honest, in reading about it, I am sort of amazed so many people are so quick to assume guilt? I mean he was having an affair with a woman and she ended up dying. However who is to say she did not fall off the balcony or jump off? The biggest thing for why I can see why he was acquitted. Reasonable doubt. How can you prove that it was not an accidental fall or a suicide? You cannot, thus that is an acquittal. The jury got it right.

The distance the body landed was what convinced me that it was not an accident or suicide. But that's me. You're thinking with your lawyer cap. :)

Judy Groezinger...but it's amazing, no one watching that segment seems to be able to put 1 and 1 and 1 and 1 and 1...together:eek:

I'm sure people can put the pieces together, but that doesn't mean they can prove it in a court of law, and if they don't think they'll get a conviction, they won't want to try.

While I do think Judy was behind Mark's murder (I am not convinced she was the one that actually pulled the trigger, I think her girlfriend or someone at her or her girlfriend's direction did) it would be hard to prove in court. You have Judy who denies everything and you have the girlfriend who I am sure would testify the same as Judy. The only thing you really have is if you could find the mysterious guy that Judy was seen with in the pawnshop and liquor store. Of course she denies knowing anything about this even though she was seen by people who knew her quite well with a biker looking guy. If you could find that guy and get him to talk than you could have a provable case.

While I do think Judy was behind Mark's murder (I am not convinced she was the one that actually pulled the trigger, I think her girlfriend or someone at her or her girlfriend's direction did) it would be hard to prove in court. You have Judy who denies everything and you have the girlfriend who I am sure would testify the same as Judy. The only thing you really have is if you could find the mysterious guy that Judy was seen with in the pawnshop and liquor store. Of course she denies knowing anything about this even though she was seen by people who knew her quite well with a biker looking guy. If you could find that guy and get him to talk than you could have a provable case.

yeah, the problem in this case is that this might be a conspiratorial murder.

Someone's going to have to talk to convict Judy. Either the man she was with purchasing the gun or Judy's lesbian girlfriend.

I thought Robert Salazar but the jury disagreed with me.

I thought he was guilty of voluntary manslaughter for not stopping Sandra from falling off the balcony. I don't think he murdered her.

I agree with Larry Gibson. There are a few moments in the segment that are baffling, and seem really off for a parent who is missing a child.

First of all, the opening scene in the segment with Larry talking about how "I haven't been the same since Tommy disappeared..." seemed really faked and forced emotions. The only time in the segment he really showed emotion was the annoyance that he was a suspect.

The statement where Larry said that they thought they would find Tommy in a place where he "would have been embarrassed - that they should have looked there" was odd as well.....Any parent whose child has been missing for any amount of time would be so relieved to find them, they wouldn't care about their own embarrassment over the safe return of their child.

The statement from the investigator about the time/mileage discrepancy in the patrol car and Larry's whereabouts on the afternoon Tommy went missing - first, Larry claims he never left the property, then his (ex)wife states that Larry said he went to town to check on his private car. First of all, he lied about where he was, and second, WHY would you go check on your CAR when your SON is missing?

This a really maddening case, especially since Larry has been convicted of 2nd degree manslaughter (and only served 3 years). What will happen if they find remains of Tommy? Nothing?

Larry served 18 months. He was sentenced to 3 years but was paroled after serving half due to good behavior. If Tommy's body was found, nothing would happen to Larry, at least not in state court as he has already been tried and convicted of the crime. Larry was actually initially charged with a much more serious crime but he was acquitted of the more serious charges and was convicted of the lesser included offense of 2nd degree manslaughter. He was originally charged with 2nd degree murder.

I am not sure that would be voluntary manslaughter. Under California law I think that would be involuntary manslaughter if you believed that he failed to stop her from falling or jumping off of the balcony. This is a response to the comment by Zack attacks about Robert Salazar.

Larry served 18 months. He was sentenced to 3 years but was paroled after serving half due to good behavior. If Tommy's body was found, nothing would happen to Larry, at least not in state court as he has already been tried and convicted of the crime. Larry was actually initially charged with a much more serious crime but he was acquitted of the more serious charges and was convicted of the lesser included offense of 2nd degree manslaughter. He was originally charged with 2nd degree murder.

Looks like the only reason the charges wouldn't stick is because there was no body.

If Larry's daughter's story was the truth, and Larry did hit Tommy until he "fell limp," then what happened next? Did she see Larry taking Tommy somewhere? If Larry did transport Tommy in the patrol car, and the mileage was checked, then couldn't the search have been isolated to the radius of the area around the Gibson house? You'd think they would have found SOMETHING.

I wonder what set Larry off, if he did in fact beat Tommy.

well, I think the vast majority of people on here think she's guilty.

She seems guilty to me. Completely devoid of any emotion over Mark's death. Never a plea to find the "real killer"

Plus, she rebounded quicker than Mr. Fuji at Survivor Series 1988 :lol:

Okay, as a lifelong wrestling fan, a Mr. Fuji-1988 Survivor Series analogy is just too awesome for words :lol:

Anyway, one guilty liar that really sticks out for me but hasn't been mentioned yet is the medical examiner in the Andre Jones case and his very half-assed explanation of how Andre could have possibly hung himself with his shoelaces. I think this guy might hold the record for blinking during an UM interview.

In all the years I have been reading this forum (since '02 or thereabout) I can only think of one person who spoke up in support of Judy Groezinger's innocence, and it was that odd "Zeer" poster - whom some speculated may have been Judy herself. I would say that she is one of the "guiltiest" based on the forum posts and nothing else. Chad Noe, Paul Pollis and Mark Nichols can't be too far behind.

In all the years I have been reading this forum (since '02 or thereabout) I can only think of one person who spoke up in support of Judy Groezinger's innocence, and it was that odd "Zeer" poster - whom some speculated may have been Judy herself. I would say that she is one of the "guiltiest" based on the forum posts and nothing else. Chad Noe, Paul Pollis and Mark Nichols can't be too far behind.

I've looked through the old threads and also remember seeing a lot of posts from someone defending Paul Pollis who claimed to be his "friend", but was highly suspected to be Paul himself.

I also remember seeing this one bizarre post from someone defending Don Dixon and claiming that he and Eric Tamiyasu were really best friends because they had "Taco Bell lunches at his office every day". Yep, wouldn't be surprised at all if Don wrote that since that Taco Bell line just SOUNDS like something he would say!

I also remember seeing this one bizarre post from someone defending Don Dixon and claiming that he and Eric Tamiyasu were really best friends because they had "Taco Bell lunches at his office every day". Yep, wouldn't be surprised at all if Don wrote that since that Taco Bell line just SOUNDS like something he would say!

I could absolutely see him saying that line! :lol: "I had nothing to do with this awful crime. I mean, we would eat Taco Bell in my office everyday and were best friends..." yeah, right.


I always thought the guy in the Doyle Wheeler segment (not he himself, but the blond officer he accused of racism) was totally guilty and completely failed to appear credible.

I've looked through the old threads and also remember seeing a lot of posts from someone defending Paul Pollis who claimed to be his "friend", but was highly suspected to be Paul himself.

I also remember seeing this one bizarre post from someone defending Don Dixon and claiming that he and Eric Tamiyasu were really best friends because they had "Taco Bell lunches at his office every day". Yep, wouldn't be surprised at all if Don wrote that since that Taco Bell line just SOUNDS like something he would say!

I want to thank you for pointing this out. I saw the Tamiyasu segment many years ago on Lifetime (it was one of their "in-house" segments, I believe). I had forgotten about the case. Your post prompted me to seek out the 14 page long thread on it - I did a forum search on "Taco Bell", lol. I read the entire thread this morning, and this case is really fascinating.

I found the post you were referring to. I definitely think Dixon wrote it. If not him, then a close friend or family member. The Taco Bell thing does seem like a comment he would make. Plus he mentioned being a biologist and a specialty in vertebra insecticide. Those particular comments just strike me as self important things one would say to boost their own ego. Kinda like if I were to say that I am a criminologist because I happen to have a BA in criminology.

I want to thank you for pointing this out. I saw the Tamiyasu segment many years ago on Lifetime (it was one of their "in-house" segments, I believe). I had forgotten about the case. Your post prompted me to seek out the 14 page long thread on it - I did a forum search on "Taco Bell", lol. I read the entire thread this morning, and this case is really fascinating.

I found the post you were referring to. I definitely think Dixon wrote it. If not him, then a close friend or family member. The Taco Bell thing does seem like a comment he would make. Plus he mentioned being a biologist and a specialty in vertebra insecticide. Those particular comments just strike me as self important things one would say to boost their own ego. Kinda like if I were to say that I am a criminologist because I happen to have a BA in criminology.

My pleasure :) . It's definitely one of the most fascinating threads to read. It seems that a lot of the people who come on here to defend guilty-looking people will bring up a bunch of new info that no one had ever before, but they won't cite any facts and sources and they'll never post again after people ask follow-up questions. One weird thing that stood out for me from the Dixon post is when he wrote "Don Dixon at his own cost took a polygraph test and passed". Since when does anyone have to PAY to take a polygraph?!

If you've never read it before, I also highly recommend checking out the board's lengthy thread on Randall Utterback (I think it's listed under "Nerdy Possessive Boyfriend"). There's a lot of dirty laundry aired from people close to the case and at least one person chimes in to defend Randall Utterback that I'm pretty sure might be Randall himself.

I just watched the Doreen Marpheo case for the first time this past weekend (THANKS CRYSTALDAWN!!) and was actually upset that old Stephen wasn't arrested based solely on his UM appearance. His demeanor during the interview, when he tries to spin it that he's sick of being the focal point of speculation made him look terribly guilty. Then bit after bit of evidence starts piling up, like the typewriter and hiring the PI, and its wholly apparent that the guy is your prototypical jealous/suspicious mysoginistic scumbag creep. But the worst thing for me was watching him try and gaze wistfully out the window at the end of the segment, as if he's just longing for his wife to come walking up the street any second. Just him and his mullet and his cup o' joe having a tender Season's Select moment...celebrate the moments of your liiiiiife....

So the UPDATE comes and unfortunately it only gets to the seceond line before cutting into the next segmet (CURSE YOU, CRYSTALDAWN!!!), so I know he topped himself but I couldn't tell why. Reading on the site I noticed that its because he suspected his new girlfriend was cheating on him, so he kills her, then himself. I wonder how Doreen's mom and sis felt when they got that news?
i remember watching this on the half hour segment way back

anyone got this on tape? or on youtube?

I could absolutely see him saying that line! :lol: "I had nothing to do with this awful crime. I mean, we would eat Taco Bell in my office everyday and were best friends..." yeah, right.


I always thought the guy in the Doyle Wheeler segment (not he himself, but the blond officer he accused of racism) was totally guilty and completely failed to appear credible.

:lol: at Taco Bell. Maybe someone should introduce Don to Kevin Poulsen--two taco fans getting together.

And yes, I've always felt Donovan Jacobs never even made the slightest attempt to provide reason why the racism accusations weren't true. The best he could come up with was something like "you just gotta know Doyle." It was such a weak contest. I think he eventually became a lawyer. Apparently, he writes, too:

http://www.police-writers.com/jacobs.html

Interesting title.


Has anyone mentioned Sam Patel, the key suspect in the Joan Jeffries case? Jeffries was hired as a secretary for Patel, who then purchased a key employee life insurance policy on her (normally reserved for senior executives and other such very "top" employees in the company hierarchy). She was subsequently murdered the night she declared she was leaving Patel's company, and her murder was committed, it seems, so that Patel could cash in on Jeffries' $250,000 death benefit while she was still an employee.

Not only is Sam Patel automatically untrustworthy because he apparently has no explanations nor qualms about his paycheck to Jeffries bouncing or why it did so, but he finally shows up at her home, late at night, claiming he has the $4,000 in back pay :mad: and proceeds to act like a total creep--asking to use her phone and for a ride back home, anything to put them in close proximity to each other. We hear later on that while Patel has a wife, he maintains a relationship with a girlfriend, and gives his excuse for turning up shirtless on the night of Jeffrie's murder at said girlfriend's house as "I was riding my bicycle around the block a few times." :confused: He refuses to turn the shirt he was wearing that night in to the police, and just generally comes up with lame excuse after probable lie throughout his entire interview. He is just so blatantly guilty it's sickening to watch.

What about Elaine Parent?

Judy Groezinger. Perhaps the guiltiest of anyone I have seen appear on a segment (even more certain than I am of Mark Nichols).

Think about it: two witnesses saw Judy and a biker dude in both the gun store and a convenience store. Both clerks (at two different stores) were 100% positive they saw Judy with this same man. One of the clerks was friends with Mark and Judy which bolsters her claim. Judy denies such a man existed.

Secondly, Judy bought a .38 pistol just a couple of days before his murder (the biker dude was with her). A .38 caliber handgun was used in Mark's murder. Judy claims she bought it for a friend of Marks because Mark didn't "have the time" to go pick it up. Color me skeptical.

Third, Judy's alibi for the night was based only on the word of a "friend" -- another woman who said Judy was there watching TV with her that night. It turns out that this is the same woman Judy moved in with one day after Mark's murder. Several friends the Police interviewed said Judy and this woman were in fact lesbian lovers. Judy, at the time of the segment, had been living with this woman for five years. Obviously, this friend had a vested interest in protecting Judy and should not be trusted with providing an alibi.

Fourth: Mark had a $100,000 life insurance policy on his head. There's your motive.

I vote for Sam Patel as well. This guy just SCREAMS guilty to me. He may not have been the trigger man, but I think he hired someone to murder Joan. Who else shows up at a co-worker's house that late at night?

I've examined Paul Pollis' case recently and tried my best to look at it objectively. A few things come up:

- We rely on the word of Charlotte's crazy mother too much
- There was never any talk of a marriage going down the tubes, any problems, any abuse
- Ignore the potentially one-sided "shed" escapade

That leaves me with a guy (Pollis) who is extremely irritated at being accused and that alone is a good reason as to why he acts the way he does in the interview. So I know he's the whipping boy around here, but no proof has come up that there was even a crime committed. The reluctance to take a polygraph is a little fishy but I didn't even find that taking off for 3 months was all that crazy. The guy didn't need 3 months to dump a body if that's what he was apparently doing, so maybe we should take his word at face value that he needed time away from it all.

Some things don't look good on him but he would definitely fall out of my top 10 of guiltiest people. I've yet to commit on him either way.


No one mentioned Sheriff Wampler? I think the guy is at least as guilty as crazy Don Dixon. What law enforcement person would even come up with the idea of "burning the bed" that the victim was found on. You didn't care to look for DNA? Or a fingerprint? Wampler had something to do with this for sure. Even a 10 year old would wait for the forensics to arrive and do their job. This guy not only never got charged with anything (obstruction of justice comes to mind) but he never lost his job. How in the world does that happen? Would you trust a Sheriff who burns evidence?

Paul seemed pretty calm in his interview.

Paul seemed pretty calm in his interview.

Does anyone know if this case is on the bad site? If so, PM me.

EDIT: nevermind, I found it, finally.

Paul seemed pretty calm in his interview.
Paul seemed arrogant to me, as for the comment on taking Charlotte's crazy mother's word for it, i dont look at her at all, i think she is insane, but the other family members seem fine and the neighbor too. i dont think he should be arrested (no evidence), but he shouldnt be given a pass and say you didnt do it like others have gotten.

Paul seemed arrogant to me, as for the comment on taking Charlotte's crazy mother's word for it, i dont look at her at all, i think she is insane, but the other family members seem fine and the neighbor too. i dont think he should be arrested (no evidence), but he shouldnt be given a pass and say you didnt do it like others have gotten.

Agreed. I think the main thing pointing to Paul Pollis is there's no other plausible theory as to what happened to her. Here's what we know:

1) She was at home sick and in no condition to leave the house.

2) All of her belongings, purse included, were left behind.

3) There was no robbery or any other signs of a struggle in the house, nor any sign of forced entry.

With all those facts in place, it's pretty easy to deduce that Paul Pollis likely did something to her and hid her body. It was broad daylight, she didn't go anywhere on her own, the house was not broken into or robbed. There's no other plausible explanation here, even if there's not enough hard evidence to charge anyone with a crime.

This is one of those missing persons cases UM aired where the truth is pretty obvious, there just isn't enough evidence to prove it.

I think it's HIGHLY suspect that Charlotte's mother kidnapped one of the children. I've read they're still on the run, but that can't be all these years later, right? That daughter would be about 20 now. My question is, why did she take only one of the kids if she was concerned about safety? That makes me find her even kookier and less credible.

This probably has already been brought up, but my vote goes to Leonard Rizzo. If you dont remember the segment, it was the one where an anonymous caller phoned the police and told them that Rizzo had killed his wife, Monica, and that her bones could be found in their backyard. To make a long story short, the police(somewhere in Texas, I believe) searched the Rizzo's backyard and came to the conclusion that the bone fragments found in the backyard belonged to several people. When the police showed up at the Rizzo home, Leonard Rizzo was "conviently" having a seizure. Prior to these events, the police had shown up at the Rizzo home, acting on concerns from Monica's co-workers,and questioned Monica, who appeared to have been beaten up quite badly.
If you do a little research on the Internet, you can find all sorts of lovely stuff about Leonard Rizzo, including numerous arrests for methamphetamine use/possession, and about his supposed involvement with motorcycle gangs.
Are there any updates on this one?

I've examined Paul Pollis' case recently and tried my best to look at it objectively. A few things come up:

- We rely on the word of Charlotte's crazy mother too much
- There was never any talk of a marriage going down the tubes, any problems, any abuse
- Ignore the potentially one-sided "shed" escapade

That leaves me with a guy (Pollis) who is extremely irritated at being accused and that alone is a good reason as to why he acts the way he does in the interview. So I know he's the whipping boy around here, but no proof has come up that there was even a crime committed. The reluctance to take a polygraph is a little fishy but I didn't even find that taking off for 3 months was all that crazy. The guy didn't need 3 months to dump a body if that's what he was apparently doing, so maybe we should take his word at face value that he needed time away from it all.

Some things don't look good on him but he would definitely fall out of my top 10 of guiltiest people. I've yet to commit on him either way.


No one mentioned Sheriff Wampler? I think the guy is at least as guilty as crazy Don Dixon. What law enforcement person would even come up with the idea of "burning the bed" that the victim was found on. You didn't care to look for DNA? Or a fingerprint? Wampler had something to do with this for sure. Even a 10 year old would wait for the forensics to arrive and do their job. This guy not only never got charged with anything (obstruction of justice comes to mind) but he never lost his job. How in the world does that happen? Would you trust a Sheriff who burns evidence?


Nice job completely ignoring the fact that he had his mom and father (the ex-coroner of the city) in his house immediately after his wife disappeared cleaning it from top to bottom. And the fact that no eyewitnesses could back up his alibi. And the fact that a neighbor had seen him in his car, one which was stuffed with bags and boxes at a time when he said he was out with the kids.


Seriously. Who the **** would ever do such a thing after reporting their wife missing? If I was innocent, I'd be outside posting fliers, rallying up search teams, and moving heaven, hell, and everything in between in trying to find where my beloved is.

Any votes for Michael Haim?

Any votes for Michael Haim?
There is something both highly suspicious about him and Bonnie's father, I believe.

Burned Evidence- Don Dixon REALLY sends some red flags and the Sheriff fairly giggling about accusations "and they've said I went up there and did these things..." The other suspect didn't seem guilty at all.

Leonard Rizzo, absolutely!

Not positive, but Steven Page and Don Sherman ruffle some feathers. Referring to your murdered wife (and self) in third person is really bizarre, not to mention other discrepancies. However, I think Steve is more likely guilty than Don.

Nice job completely ignoring the fact that he had his mom and father (the ex-coroner of the city) in his house immediately after his wife disappeared cleaning it from top to bottom.

My first thought about this is that Paul Pollis must be guilty, because there is no reason for him to clean the house from top to bottom if he's innocent. But...I can't remember who claimed that he cleaned the house. Was it the police? Or Paul's mother-in-law? If the the police said that, I'm inclined to believe he killed her. If the mother-in-law said that, I don't consider her a credible source, as others have mentioned on this thread.

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

I don't see the Jay Given murder talked about around here much and I didn't see the segment until very recently, but John Cardona is definitely one of the all-time guiltiest suspects in the history of UM! And amazingly, he committed the murder a few yards away from a room filled with over 400 people and STILL got away with it!

Virtually all the evidence points to him, but sadly, there just wasn't enough to build up a solid case against him. If there were any eyewitnesses, Cardona probably had enough clout to scare them out of talking and after 30 years, I doubt this case will ever be solved unless someone decides to come forward.

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

I don't see the Jay Given murder talked about around here much and I didn't see the segment until very recently, but John Cardona is definitely one of the all-time guiltiest suspects in the history of UM! And amazingly, he committed the murder a few yards away from a room filled with over 400 people and STILL got away with it!

Virtually all the evidence points to him, but sadly, there just wasn't enough to build up a solid case against him. If there were any eyewitnesses, Cardona probably had enough clout to scare them out of talking and after 30 years, I doubt this case will ever be solved unless someone decides to come forward.

Yes I forgot about the Jay Given murder. Cardona is without a question the triggerman, since he was seen at the event/rally by several people, and he had no reason to be there since he backed the other candidate.

I just saw Larry Gibson for the first time yesterday; while I hate to point the finger at a father, it seemed pretty apparent that he never once denied it. He was more like a defence lawyer. "Well, can it be proven?"

I say it will always be Donnie Hansen.

My first thought about this is that Paul Pollis must be guilty, because there is no reason for him to clean the house from top to bottom if he's innocent. But...I can't remember who claimed that he cleaned the house. Was it the police? Or Paul's mother-in-law? If the the police said that, I'm inclined to believe he killed her. If the mother-in-law said that, I don't consider her a credible source, as others have mentioned on this thread.

It was the mother-in-law and Charlotte's brother, but its not like that matters because Paul Pollis admitted to cleaning the house, and the chief investigator said he cleaned it "spotless."

It was the mother-in-law and Charlotte's brother, but its not like that matters because Paul Pollis admitted to cleaning the house, and the chief investigator said he cleaned it "spotless."

I saw this for the first time in quite a while shortly after my Gibson post Saturday. While I do sympathize with Pollis somewhat for the points illustrated by ClockworkHigh (and maybe it just seems that way because it followed the obviously-guilty Gibson), I think the circumstantial evidence combined is just too much. If it were just a clean house, or just a shed, or just one thing individually, I'd say no. All these things combined? I'd be stunned if Pollis didn't do it.

I saw this for the first time in quite a while shortly after my Gibson post Saturday. While I do sympathize with Pollis somewhat for the points illustrated by ClockworkHigh (and maybe it just seems that way because it followed the obviously-guilty Gibson), I think the circumstantial evidence combined is just too much. If it were just a clean house, or just a shed, or just one thing individually, I'd say no. All these things combined? I'd be stunned if Pollis didn't do it.

Actually, I've been thinking about this one a lot over the past couple of weeks. While I still think he's guilty, what's the motive? She has an ear infection, so he up and kills her?

Actually, I've been thinking about this one a lot over the past couple of weeks. While I still think he's guilty, what's the motive? She has an ear infection, so he up and kills her?

Paul was the one that took Charlotte to the hospital late the night before she disappeared. She disappeared the next day and the last time someone (other than Paul) spoke to her was her mother early in the morning after her return from the hospital. So what possibly could have happened in that small time frame for Paul to have killed his wife? If he planned on killing her, why take her to the hospital at all? And if they had an argument and he struck her and he accidentally killed her, how did he pull off the cover up? And where were his kids during all of this? Paul showed no signs of fatigue the next day, and that would be quite a feat had he been up all night disposing of Charlotte's body and cleaning up a crime scene.

I never thought that Paul Freshour was guilty, but recently someone who claims to be his grandson posted on the "Did Paul Freshour admit to being the Circleville Writer" thread, and if this person is for real, then my beliefs about Freshour's guilt or innocence are severely compromised.

Sam Patel. Oh, so your business partner, whom you 1) had dinner with that night 2) had issues paying/contention with 3) a huge life insurance policy out on was murdered? And you're completely innocent? Then why 1) was vomit containing the contents of your dinner from that meeting next to the car 2) were you riding your bike around with your shirt off after the murder on a freezing night? 3) Say you gave the shirt to the police but they say you never did?

He seems so guilty. The vomit thing is just unbelievable. We're supposed to believe that he was never there...yet bile containing precisely what he ordered from the restaurant is there? Come on! IIRC it wasn't just some common kind of food either, it perfectly matched his order.

Sam Patel. Oh, so your business partner, whom you 1) had dinner with that night 2) had issues paying/contention with 3) a huge life insurance policy out on was murdered? And you're completely innocent? Then why 1) was vomit containing the contents of your dinner from that meeting next to the car 2) were you riding your bike around with your shirt off after the murder on a freezing night? 3) Say you gave the shirt to the police but they say you never did?

He seems so guilty. The vomit thing is just unbelievable. We're supposed to believe that he was never there...yet bile containing precisely what he ordered from the restaurant is there? Come on! IIRC it wasn't just some common kind of food either, it perfectly matched his order.


YES. Totally agree. He seemed so freakin' guilty.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they've already been mentioned (too lazy to browse all thirteen pages, sorry) but it needs to be said again and again: the Noe/Prewitt family. Seriously, how the hell did it take so long to get stuff moving in this case given the amount of dirt they had on these people? How did a bunch of white-trash rednecks manage to keep this under wraps for so long while running the kind of crime syndicate that would make the Mafia proud? I know I use this phrase a lot but OJ has a better chance of being innocent than these people.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they've already been mentioned (too lazy to browse all thirteen pages, sorry) but it needs to be said again and again: the Noe/Prewitt family. Seriously, how the hell did it take so long to get stuff moving in this case given the amount of dirt they had on these people? How did a bunch of white-trash rednecks manage to keep this under wraps for so long while running the kind of crime syndicate that would make the Mafia proud? I know I use this phrase a lot but OJ has a better chance of being innocent than these people.

Many of us were kids when that segment first aired. I was 13 and at that time, even I thought that family was so blatantly guilty that it was almost comical. And the past decade (and earlier) posting on this board, posters here have had a field day with nicknames and observations over that family because their guilt was obvious on epic levels.

And keep in a mind that at that time, all we had to go on was the UM segment. We didn't know that Beverly's husband had conveniently been stabbed to death in 1980 leading in her arrest. We didn't know that Beverly and Ida liked to burn down homes for insurance money. We didn't know that Chad had a habit of banging every girl he seemed to come in contact with, including a nurse in his wife's hospital room while she lay comatose during her MS.

It does make you sick that an obviously guilty family like that could evade prison for so long. Poor Jonathan. At least with his grandmother dead and his mother finally in prison, his future wife will be safe. Because everyone else who has married into that family has ended up murdered.

Sam Patel
The Noes (?)...the people who killed Wendy Camp, her little girl, and another woman and then claimed they "left them at walmart"

We didn't know that Chad had a habit of banging every girl he seemed to come in contact with, including a nurse in his wife's hospital room while she lay comatose during her MS.

Whoa, where did you hear that? I never heard of that before.

Whoa, where did you hear that? I never heard of that before.

Wendy's sister Aisha. A couple of her family members walked in on that little display.

Wendy's sister Aisha. A couple of her family members walked in on that little display.

Aisha told me the same. Her parents went to the hospital to see Wendy (who I believe was in a coma at the time?) and they walked in on Chad having sex in the hallway with a teenaged girl. Apparently the encounter resulted in a pregnancy! ....not sure if she had the baby or what....but Chad was supposed to be there being a supportive husband, and instead he was banging some chick in the damn hallway.

Aisha told me the same. Her parents went to the hospital to see Wendy (who I believe was in a coma at the time?) and they walked in on Chad having sex in the hallway with a teenaged girl. Apparently the encounter resulted in a pregnancy! ....not sure if she had the baby or what....but Chad was supposed to be there being a supportive husband, and instead he was banging some chick in the damn hallway.

Classy.

Aisha told me the same. Her parents went to the hospital to see Wendy (who I believe was in a coma at the time?) and they walked in on Chad having sex in the hallway with a teenaged girl. Apparently the encounter resulted in a pregnancy! ....not sure if she had the baby or what....but Chad was supposed to be there being a supportive husband, and instead he was banging some chick in the damn hallway.

Wait where is this place again?

and as for Sam Patel, who amongst us doesn't like the occasional 11:00 PM bike ride and showing up shirtless when visiting our girlfriend?

and as for Sam Patel, who amongst us doesn't like the occasional 11:00 PM bike ride and showing up shirtless when visiting our girlfriend?

This is highly suspicious behavior considering he was last seen with a murder victim an hour before, but I have had on a handful of occasions to go out for a run late at night. It's weird, and I can't fully explain why, but it has happened. I can overlook that little oddity in Patel's story, but everything else paints him as one guilty man.

Wait where is this place again?

The hospital where Wendy was in a coma...in the hallway. What a great husband Chad was.:(

The hospital where Wendy was in a coma...in the hallway. What a great husband Chad was.:(

yeah do you have like a street address or the floor this type of thing happens on? I would like to investigate further and see if this, um, misbehavior is still going on to this day.