Ok so I know that UM has to try to get heaps of information into one little segment but in the case of Cindy James when I finished watching the segment it left me asking questions about the investigation undertaken.

- Cindy's husband- they separated in 1984 and three months later the harrassing phonecalls started. Maybe, Cindy made up these phone call stories because she couldn't handle breaking up with her husband....but did the police investigate the husband at all? Why did they separate? Did he have violent tendencies. He could have been the one making the calls. Just a thought
- Maybe Cindy had a disagreement with someone that was associated with her through her work with children with emotional/behavioural issues- not a child but maybe a parent or a co-worker- does anyone know if the police investigated this angle?

Does anyone known if these angles were investigated? These seem like the first areas I would search. Did anyone else think that the police were hiding something- maybe they screwed up and then covered up. Any thoughts?

- Cindy's husband- they separated in 1984 and three months later the harrassing phonecalls started. Maybe, Cindy made up these phone call stories because she couldn't handle breaking up with her husband....but did the police investigate the husband at all? Why did they separate? Did he have violent tendencies. He could have been the one making the calls. Just a thought

Don''t hold me to this, but I believe the police and Ozzie Kaban looked into the ex-husband.

How could he not be the first suspect?


- Maybe Cindy had a disagreement with someone that was associated with her through her work with children with emotional/behavioural issues- not a child but maybe a parent or a co-worker- does anyone know if the police investigated this angle?

1.Keep in mind that it isn;t just the police at this point. It's also the PI Ozzie Kaban. Did Ozzie Kaban investigate these angles as well?

2. I could buy that if the harassment was for a shorter period of time. But this lasted way too long for it to be a random co-worker with a grudge.

3. I believe Cindy changed her name and address. So this co-worker would have to have gone to some great lengths to find her new name and address.

4. I question whether one person could have kept up a campaign like this all on his own. There would need to be at least one other person.

Does anyone known if these angles were investigated? These seem like the first areas I would search

Considering how long the investigation was and the fact that there were police rollers posted...i would have to imagine that all persons romantically connected to Cindy were looked at and their alibis were checked.

Did anyone else think that the police were hiding something- maybe they screwed up and then covered up. Any thoughts?

1. What would they have to cover up? What was covered up? The suicide?

2. With all respect to the family and to Cindy James...Cindy wouldn't talk!!
If you think about it....Cindy was the one covering up facts.

The police needed Cindy to tell them what she knew about the killer...Cindy didn;t. He refusal to talk is what hindered this case.

3. The police seemed pretty forthright in giving information to the press. That reporter seemed to have a pretty good beat on the case.

4. Any coverup would have to happen ...AFTER Cindy's death.

5. Usually when there's a cover up, you have people refusing to talk, information missing, conflicting evidence. I don;t think any of these things occured in this case.

6. Do the police really need to cover up anything? I have to imagine that the consensus among the public was split on whether the attacks were real or not.

The police already have a pretty good cover story that Cindy herself provided. That she committed suicide due to insanity.

What else do they really need to do?

this segment always made me think...

I find myself split between being able to decide whether i think for sure that she some how did all of this herself or in fact some one was doing all of this to her and finally did murder her.

In the segnment they say that she had her hands and feet tied together behind her back and was overdosed on morphine and other drugs, I don't know about most people but I think I would struggle to tie my hands and feet together behind my back even without morphine..

What makes me tick even more is the mention that she always seemed to be with holding information about the attacks, leading one to believe that there was something A LOT bigger to the story..

There's a site on the site http://melaniehack.com/index.html which i believe was set up by Cindy's sister.

On the site there's an audio file down the bottom of the first page which is an actual recording of one of the threatening calls she supposedly received. I don't know if its just me, but after listening to the audio file a few times, I can't help but to be almost certain that the voice is a female's voice speaking in a slow and low, husky voice.. I suppose that just adds more question marks for me..

What makes me tick even more is the mention that she always seemed to be with holding information about the attacks, leading one to believe that there was something A LOT bigger to the story..

Like what? What else was there to this story?

In the segnment they say that she had her hands and feet tied together behind her back and was overdosed on morphine and other drugs, I don't know about most people but I think I would struggle to tie my hands and feet together behind my back even without morphine..

There have been people who have managed to tie themselves and bound themselves for the purpose of faking.

You don't need to be a contortionist or escape artist to do so.

- Cindy's husband- they separated in 1984 and three months later the harrassing phonecalls started. Maybe, Cindy made up these phone call stories because she couldn't handle breaking up with her husband....but did the police investigate the husband at all? Why did they separate? Did he have violent tendencies. He could have been the one making the calls. Just a thought

Does anyone known if these angles were investigated? These seem like the first areas I would search. Did anyone else think that the police were hiding something- maybe they screwed up and then covered up. Any thoughts?

Makepeace (the ex-husband) was definitely investigated. At one point, the police interrogated him for 5+ hours and said they had the evidence to prove it was him, but it was a bluff - they had basically nothing except for the fact that he was the ex-husband, which made him #1 on a suspect list that really had no other suspects. Makepeace didn't break during the interrogation. The harassment went on for years after this interrogation, but Makepeace was not considered much of a suspect; again, no evidence to support it. And later when one of the attacks occured, Makepeace was out of the country with supporting documentation to prove it. So, if it was him, you are talking about quite the conspiracy with him hiring or simply having others harass her.

Like what? What else was there to this story?



There have been people who have managed to tie themselves and bound themselves for the purpose of faking.

You don't need to be a contortionist or escape artist to do so.
Don't think there was anything else to the story... it's just how adamant she was with keeping the person's identity a secret without ever telling anyone, just makes me think that either way, whether ultimately she did fake everything or indeed if some one had "got to her" there is more to the story than what aired on UM..

In terms of people managing to tie their hand's and feet together behind their back.. I don't know still seems too tricky too me.. I don't think any of them that have managed that could do so with a lethal dose of morphine in their bloodstream.

I'm still interested to get people's thoughts on the audio.. I'm convinced that it sounds like a woman..

Further to my message above, after doing a bit more looking around.. there appears to be a lot more to this story..

indeed if some one had "got to her" there is more to the story than what aired on UM..

I'm not clear on what you mean "got to her"

You mean silence her?

Why now after all those years of attacks?

It's not like she didn't call the police before. The police were called much early in the game and were involved in the case. I personally think that would be worth killing someone to silence them.

I don't think any of them that have managed that could do so with a lethal dose of morphine in their bloodstream.

There's some time before the effects of morphine take place.
Enough to tie one's self up.


In terms of people managing to tie their hand's and feet together behind their back.. I don't know still seems too tricky too me

It's an easy enough experiment to replicate.
Get some rope, a friend, a stopwatch.

See if it's possible.

Further to my message above, after doing a bit more looking around.. there appears to be a lot more to this story..

such as....:confused:

I thought the two calls that Makepeace kept from his answering machine sounded more like a woman than a man.

There were at least two times Cindy went through testing (regarding her mental state) where the tests showed her to be highly intelligent.

I've read both books twice. I'm not 100% convinced, but tend to think that she probably staged her death (and most of the harassment, although I do believe at least some of it, possibly just some of the calls, were real).

The voice in the recording does sound like a muffled woman's voice. However this doesn't mean that it was Cindy. There are too many factors here to just dismiss this case entirely. Cindy may well have been doing this to herself, but that raises the most important question if true, Why? I understand that someone with mental issues may beat themselves up and make it look like they are being harrassed repeatedly to get attention, but you can't get attention if you go so far as to kill yourself in the process. That will of course bring up the point that "maybe she didn't intend to kill herself but just over dosed by accident while staging the scene." Ok, if you are staging the scen without intent to kill yourself, why bother with morphine at all?

i don't claim to even have a working theory of what happened to Cindy, but I just can't by that she staged all this. Maybe I am wrong but someone being found at the side of a road with hands tied behind their back after a lethal overdose, just doesn't sound like suicide. Jumping out a window? yeah. shot in the head? sure. wrists slashed? ok. lethal injection overdose? fine. But hands tied behind back and lethal overdose and doing all this at the side of the road? BS. There has to be more to this. As to what that is, I have no idea.

However this doesn't mean that it was Cindy

Are you suggesting Cindy's attacker was a woman?

or that another party was involved in this case?

Maybe I am wrong but someone being found at the side of a road with hands tied behind their back after a lethal overdose, just doesn't sound like suicide. Jumping out a window? yeah. shot in the head? sure. wrists slashed? ok. lethal injection overdose? fine. But hands tied behind back and lethal overdose and doing all this at the side of the road? BS. There has to be more to this. As to what that is, I have no idea.

1. I would argue that Cindy James death is not that bizzare. In fact it's a basically an overdose suicide. Overdose suicide is a popular method of suicide amongst women. The only bizarre part was the attempt to tie herself up. That;s it.

I would actually be a little more skeptical if Cindy shot herself rather than drug herself.

2. You have to keep in mind that suicide is only part of Cindy's plan. She also has to make it seem like her "attacker" caused the murder.

3. Cindy may have had help in staging her own suicide..... Perhaps via a private detective.

Ok, if you are staging the scen without intent to kill yourself, why bother with morphine at all?


What else was she going to use?

Cindy may well have been doing this to herself, but that raises the most important question if true, Why? I understand that someone with mental issues may beat themselves up and make it look like they are being harrassed repeatedly to get attention, but you can't get attention if you go so far as to kill yourself in the process.

I think a big reason some people committ suicide is to imagine what it would be like for all their friends, family members, enemies, crying and feeling sorry for her. You sort of imagine all your friends talking about you and saying "we should have listened to her. We should have treated her better".

I know this from experience, because I had the same thoughts when I considered suicide.

You start to wallowing in the idea of people feeling sorry or you and spending time talking about you. It;s really the idea of getting other people to share the same pain your going through.

It's a big reason why a lot of people committ suicide....
1. to gain sympathy
2. to have other people share and understand the pain your suffering
3. To get back at people in a twisted type of revenge.


There are too many factors here to just dismiss this case entirely.
What real evidence proves that there is an attacker? Other than Cindy's own claims.

How is this case any different from the Wackers?

That will of course bring up the point that "maybe she didn't intend to kill herself but just over dosed by accident while staging the scene." Ok, if you are staging the scen without intent to kill yourself, why bother with morphine at all?

1. Why after all these attacks would a killer(s) just suddenly decide know is the time to off Cindy James? The only real change that occured in Cindy's life was that she was under suicide watch.

2. In both scenarios, there is staging,

If Cindy James was killed, then her killers were trying to make it seem like a suicide by using the morphine. After all, why not just shoot her.

If Cindy committed suicide, she was trying to make it seem like murder.

Why?:confused:

All very good points indeed. And I will agree that much of the evidence really could go either way. I do find it interesting that the police were never able to ever find anything substancial to support anything.

I am curious as to what, if anything, Cindy was going to finally tell her mother when all was said and done. That of course could be entirely made up but who knows?

My gut has always told me there was much more to this case than a suicide.

As far as the attacker being a woman, I have no idea. I am simply saying that the voice on her sister's website sounds like that of a womans. What I would like to see in this case is for that recording to be looked at by audio specialists. Voice recordings are as unique as fingerprints. If that could be cross referenced against any existing recordings of Cindy's voice, it could lay the matter to rest completely if it were to turn out to match her voice. If it didn't match, that opens up a whole new playing field.

It would be interesting to know how exactly cindy felt about her parents. Even if she was thinking of suicide, I cant believe that unless she had some deep anger toward her parents that she would put them through this whole situation by going through with it in this manner.

Voice recordings are as unique as fingerprints. If that could be cross referenced against any existing recordings of Cindy's voice, it could lay the matter to rest completely if it were to turn out to match her voice. If it didn't match, that opens up a whole new playing field.

1. I don;t think it's that easy. This is analog and tape technology were talking about.

2. It;s quite possible that a recording of Cindy's voice doesn;t exist. if you really think about it...how many recordings exist of your own voice?

3. There is a good chance that whoever spoke into the phone, put a piece of cloth over the mouthpiece.

I think a big reason some people committ suicide is to imagine what it would be like for all their friends, family members, enemies, crying and feeling sorry for her. You sort of imagine all your friends talking about you and saying "we should have listened to her. We should have treated her better".

I know this from experience, because I had the same thoughts when I considered suicide.

You start to wallowing in the idea of people feeling sorry or you and spending time talking about you. It;s really the idea of getting other people to share the same pain your going through.

It's a big reason why a lot of people committ suicide....
1. to gain sympathy
2. to have other people share and understand the pain your suffering
3. To get back at people in a twisted type of revenge.


In other words, Munchausen syndrome.

But instead of making a child sick or died to attract attention and sympathy (which would be Munchausen by proxy), she did it all to herself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
I think a big reason some people committ suicide is to imagine what it would be like for all their friends, family members, enemies, crying and feeling sorry for her. You sort of imagine all your friends talking about you and saying "we should have listened to her. We should have treated her better".

I know this from experience, because I had the same thoughts when I considered suicide.

You start to wallowing in the idea of people feeling sorry or you and spending time talking about you. It;s really the idea of getting other people to share the same pain your going through.

It's a big reason why a lot of people committ suicide....
1. to gain sympathy
2. to have other people share and understand the pain your suffering
3. To get back at people in a twisted type of revenge.

In other words, Munchausen syndrome.

But instead of making a child sick or died to attract attention and sympathy (which would be Munchausen by proxy), she did it all to herself.

Well put.

Here is a scenario (keep in mind this is only speculation):

Given the circumstances of her death being from an overdose of morphine most suicide advocates obviously believe that Cindy would have no trouble obtaining morphine or other drugs not available to the every day person. So, lets just suppose that someone else connected to her, possibly a coworker, might be just a easily capable of obtaining these drugs. Isn't it at least possible that perhaps Cindy was involved in or witness to something along the lines of a drug ring operating out of the area?

Now given what is known from UM, there isn't anything in the way of hard evidence to support this but as I have said before, UM cannot always give all the facts in a case. There may be no known leads in this direction, but it doesn't mean the leads aren't there. Maybe they just haven't been found.

I am not saying that I believe this is what happened, just playing devil's advocate here. There are a lot of good points on both sides of this argument. With the similarities with this case and the Wacker case, I would have to say I think it is more likely that Cindy did this to herself than the Wackers did, but I still feel there is more to the Cindy James case than we know at this point. My personal feelings on this are that Cindy was murdered. Perhaps her sisters book will shake things up a bit and new info will come out.

There are other new report segments out there on sites I cannot state in this but if you watch them, there are more details (some contradictory to UM) that come out. Some even telling more definatively that Cindy was considering suicide, because of the stress of her harassments or as part of staging them. Either way, they are interesting to watch.

Ok, after posting that, I just found another video clip I had not seen before. I am reasonably certain that the theory I stated above is plausible, and that police should really take a good long look at Cindy's ex-husband and any connections he may have to any potential drug rings. You have to ask yourself, if the threatening messages that are on Cindy's sister's website came from Cindy's ex, why would he get threatening calls about Cindy? The possible drug connection (which one of those messages implies) makes some sense.

Isn't it at least possible that perhaps Cindy was involved in or witness to something along the lines of a drug ring operating out of the area?

1. Wouldn't this prolonged harassement campaign cause more light to be shed on their organization than any whistleblowing by Cindy? Wouldn't they be better off just doing nothing to her or simply killing Cindy right away? Wouldn't that be a lot less expensive and more effective than attracting police with these bizzare harassement attacks.

2. Considering that Cindy hasn't said anything about their organization, wouldn;t she be keeping up her end of the bargain? Why are they continuing the harassment if she;s not saying anything? More harassment just runs the risk of her speaking to the cops.

3. It would have to be a murder that she witnessed rather than drug dealing.
The harassment lasted for years. Why would a drug organization go through that trouble for drug charges from 5 or so years ago?

4. How would Cindy really gain information that damaging to a drug organization? Was she in on the operation?
This can;t be a case of Cindy just seeing some kids dealing H on a street corner? she would have to have seen some seriously damaging evidence.

1. Wouldn't this prolonged harassement campaign cause more light to be shed on their organization than any whistleblowing by Cindy? Wouldn't they be better off just doing nothing to her or simply killing Cindy right away? Wouldn't that be a lot less expensive and more effective than attracting police with these bizzare harassement attacks.

2. Considering that Cindy hasn't said anything about their organization, wouldn;t she be keeping up her end of the bargain? Why are they continuing the harassment if she;s not saying anything? More harassment just runs the risk of her speaking to the cops.

3. It would have to be a murder that she witnessed rather than drug dealing.
The harassment lasted for years. Why would a drug organization go through that trouble for drug charges from 5 or so years ago?

4. How would Cindy really gain information that damaging to a drug organization? Was she in on the operation?
This can;t be a case of Cindy just seeing some kids dealing H on a street corner? she would have to have seen some seriously damaging evidence.
Mastermind you make excellent points. I guess this is what makes this case so baffling. There's a lot of arguments on both sides ie. she staged the harassment and committed suicide or that she was being harassed by some one or a group of people who ultimately killed her.

One argument which could be put forward in favor of some one getting to her (killing her finally) is that after being released from hospital she revealed that she had been with holding information and knew who was responsible for the harassment. The person, or people then ultimately decided that it was time to murder her in order to silence her. I have to admit I have never heard of the drug ring theory as another member has just put forward.

How ever another theory which I personally feel is a bit more plausible is.. Her ex husband Dr. Roy Makepeace was apparently friend's with another psychiatrist by the name of Dr. James Tyhurst. I believe that at around 1982 Cindy, still married to Roy took a trip with him to Gabriola Island to visit a few other friend's all of whom happened to be psychiatrists.

Now I've read a couple of different things here:

1- I read that she initially claimed to see her husband and another psychiatrist cutting up and disposing of a dead bodies. Now, I am not sure about this but I read some where that she initially told a couple about this, but she was passed off as "crazy" and that no one believed that 2 well respected psychiatrists would do such a thing.

2- She found out that a psychiatrist was practicing radical psychiatric therapies and sexually abusing some of his female patients.

At this point it is interesting to note that not long after this trip to Gabriola island, Cindy and Roy broke up.

I think its possible that she stumbled upon a huge secret which involved a group of psychiatrists engaging in sexual abuse and she was scared to open her mouth and she probably felt she would not be believed.

It's interesting to note that Dr. James Tyhurst has since been charged and convicted of sexual abuse on one of his patients with numerous others coming forward also.

Why would they not just kill Cindy straight away?

1- Roy Makepeace : Being his wife he most likely still had feelings for her and probably didn't want any serious harm (ie death) to come to her, at the same time he probably wanted her to keep her mouth shut so he let the harassment continue thinking that no harm would come to her and that she would just be scared into silence.

2- They're psychiatrists: I'm not sure about the state of Cindy's mental health prior to all of this occurring, but surely if anyone could "get inside some one's head" so to speak and "play with their mind", frighten them, make some one think that they're crazy, I think psychiatrists would be one of the most capable groups of people to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
1. Wouldn't this prolonged harassement campaign cause more light to be shed on their organization than any whistleblowing by Cindy? Wouldn't they be better off just doing nothing to her or simply killing Cindy right away? Wouldn't that be a lot less expensive and more effective than attracting police with these bizzare harassement attacks.

2. Considering that Cindy hasn't said anything about their organization, wouldn;t she be keeping up her end of the bargain? Why are they continuing the harassment if she;s not saying anything? More harassment just runs the risk of her speaking to the cops.

3. It would have to be a murder that she witnessed rather than drug dealing.
The harassment lasted for years. Why would a drug organization go through that trouble for drug charges from 5 or so years ago?

4. How would Cindy really gain information that damaging to a drug organization? Was she in on the operation?
This can;t be a case of Cindy just seeing some kids dealing H on a street corner? she would have to have seen some seriously damaging evidence.
Mastermind you make excellent points. I guess this is what makes this case so baffling. There's a lot of arguments on both sides ie. she staged the harassment and committed suicide or that she was being harassed by some one or a group of people who ultimately killed her.

One argument which could be put forward in favor of some one getting to her (killing her finally) is that after being released from hospital she revealed that she had been with holding information and knew who was responsible for the harassment. The person, or people then ultimately decided that it was time to murder her in order to silence her. I have to admit I have never heard of the drug ring theory as another member has just put forward.

How ever another theory which I personally feel is a bit more plausible is.. Her ex husband Dr. Roy Makepeace was apparently friend's with another psychiatrist by the name of Dr. James Tyhurst. I believe that at around 1982 Cindy, still married to Roy took a trip with him to Gabriola Island to visit a few other friend's all of whom happened to be psychiatrists.

Now I've read a couple of different things here:

1- I read that she initially claimed to see her husband and another psychiatrist cutting up and disposing of a dead bodies. Now, I am not sure about this but I read some where that she initially told a couple about this, but she was passed off as "crazy" and that no one believed that 2 well respected psychiatrists would do such a thing.

2- She found out that a psychiatrist was practicing radical psychiatric therapies and sexually abusing some of his female patients.

At this point it is interesting to note that not long after this trip to Gabriola island, Cindy and Roy broke up.

I think its possible that she stumbled upon a huge secret which involved a group of psychiatrists engaging in sexual abuse and she was scared to open her mouth and she probably felt she would not be believed.

It's interesting to note that Dr. James Tyhurst has since been charged and convicted of sexual abuse on one of his patients with numerous others coming forward also.

Why would they not just kill Cindy straight away?

1- Roy Makepeace : Being his wife he most likely still had feelings for her and probably didn't want any serious harm (ie death) to come to her, at the same time he probably wanted her to keep her mouth shut so he let the harassment continue thinking that no harm would come to her and that she would just be scared into silence.

2- They're psychiatrists: I'm not sure about the state of Cindy's mental health prior to all of this occurring, but surely if anyone could "get inside some one's head" so to speak and "play with their mind", frighten them, make some one think that they're crazy, I think psychiatrists would be one of the most capable groups of people to do so.


Your theory certainly does make an exciting mystery novel. (I'd read it. ;) )

As to whether it makes a plausible murder theory.....

Ironically your theory may provide a reason why Cindy orchestrated these attacks on herself.

Perhaps she was sexually abused by this psychiatrist. She tried to tell people about it but they didn;t believe her. This skepticism by here husband may have been the reason the marriage dissolved.

Having been hurt by the abuse, the divorce and the skepticism...Cindy's psyche devolved into this Munchausen syndrome in which she tried to create this mystery assailant.

Who knows maybe she intended this behavior as a way to get back at the psychiatrist, her husband and every one else.

Your theory certainly does make an exciting mystery novel. (I'd read it. ;) )

As to whether it makes a plausible murder theory.....

Ironically your theory may provide a reason why Cindy orchestrated these attacks on herself.

Perhaps she was sexually abused by this psychiatrist. She tried to tell people about it but they didn;t believe her. This skepticism by here husband may have been the reason the marriage dissolved.

Having been hurt by the abuse, the divorce and the skepticism...Cindy's psyche devolved into this Munchausen syndrome in which she tried to create this mystery assailant.

Who knows maybe she intended this behavior as a way to get back at the psychiatrist, her husband and every one else.

Meh, it still presuppose that something must have happened to Cindy James to cause her mind to unravel, some sort of criminal conspiracy, while in fact mental illness can happen to people with no reason at all other than chemical imbalances in the brain. Mentally ill people can go very, very, very far to prove to others that their perception of reality is true, when any sane tierce person can see it doesn't make any rational sense.

In absence of any information or evidence that she was sexually abused or maltreated by any tierce person before the terror campaign began, my take is consistent with Occam's Razor, and much simpler.

She was a shy, depressed woman with self-confidence issues. Her neediness drove her husband away and he divorced, worsening the situation. With deep needs for attention and sympathy, she felt that the only way she could obtain such comfort from others was by tricking them to do so, otherwise they wouldn't care. It wasn't with bad and evil intentions like Marie Hilley, but simply to make them believe she was in constant danger so that they would care for her.

Rather than seeking psychological help and confront the fact that she was maybe losing control and going "crazy", which can an immense hurdle to anyone who is proud enough to believe he or she doesn't need to go see a shrink, she concocted this story that someone was constantly trying to hurt or kill her. And naturally, people around her bought it at first. People would took care of her, give her their attention, try to protect her and be there for her, which would all fulfill her need to feel loved and wanted in this world. This is consistent with Munchausen syndrome.

As I say, it isn't an evil plot to cheat other people for material reasons. I genuinely feel Cindy was living Hell inside her mind. While what I say can seem harsh, it isn't with the intent of badmouthing Cindy, but just to put what she was living through under another light.

In the end, though, probably people close to her, as the investigators themselves, were starting to think that something was amiss, that such a sustained campaign of terror of several years from an invisible cabal that no one has ever seen but her wasn't making any sense. They started to treat Cindy consequently to her actions: as if she were setting them up for her own selfish little need for attention. They pressured her into seeking medical help, which she did only reluctantly.

Feeling cornered and depressed again, probably thinking that she was all bad, that no one loved her anymore and the didn't deserve the love from others anyway, she decided to end it right there by killing herself. However, she wanted people to feel guilty about her death as well, so she made sure of driving her point that it was their fault by setting it up so she was indeed tied up and murdered in a "told-you-so" kind of way, while in fact it was all the results of impaired perceptions from her mind and her reluctance to acknowledge her own weaknesses.

I'm really sorry for her sister and her family to have lived through this ordeal, and still living through it years after her death. This is certainly not easy. However, there is no harm in recognizing that, perhaps, Cindy James' worst enemy was Cindy James and that there was no boogeymen persecuting Cindy except inside her own mind.

Your theory certainly does make an exciting mystery novel. (I'd read it. ;) )

As to whether it makes a plausible murder theory.....

Ironically your theory may provide a reason why Cindy orchestrated these attacks on herself.

Perhaps she was sexually abused by this psychiatrist. She tried to tell people about it but they didn;t believe her. This skepticism by here husband may have been the reason the marriage dissolved.

Having been hurt by the abuse, the divorce and the skepticism...Cindy's psyche devolved into this Munchausen syndrome in which she tried to create this mystery assailant.

Who knows maybe she intended this behavior as a way to get back at the psychiatrist, her husband and every one else.
Again, good points..

Again, this is what makes the case so baffling. :eek:

If Cindy James tormentor was real, it should have been really easy to capture this guy.




1. A "sting operation" to at the very least get a visual on this guy. They could even get a double in place of Cindy. It wouldn;t be the most complicated operation

2. undercover cops living in the house next door with a camera should do the trick.

3. Hell even getting an undercover tail car should allow you to get sight of this guy.

If Cindy James tormentor was real, it should have been really easy to capture this guy.


If the tormentor was real, he would be a super-mastermind of crime capable of supernatural feats unknown to mankind. The tormentor would be, in short, a super-ninja. Only such powerful creature could escape being seen by anyone but the victim for years on end, despite Cindy's house being under police stakeout, without anyone catching even the faintest glimpse of him.

Why waste his talents on tormenting an innocent middle-aged lonely woman "for the lulz", when he could steal huge fortunes and execute the best whacking jobs and still not getting caught with his power of invisibility and obfuscation? That man would be rich beyond belief and relaxing in Ibiza with nude chicks besides him serving him pina coladas.

That is one of the main reasons why I think Cindy James was making this all up. Either the guy was some incredible underachieving supervillain capable of being totally invisible to anyone but her, or the guy simply didn't exist.

If Cindy James tormentor was real, it should have been really easy to capture this guy.




1. A "sting operation" to at the very least get a visual on this guy. They could even get a double in place of Cindy. It wouldn;t be the most complicated operation

2. undercover cops living in the house next door with a camera should do the trick.

3. Hell even getting an undercover tail car should allow you to get sight of this guy.
These are good points. It's actually quite interesting that the police didn't do any of these things.

During the segment, the reporter says that coincidentally nothing would ever happen when the police were watching the house. Cindy's mother how ever raises an excellent rebuttal by saying that "well of course no one would harass her whilst the police are watching the house because they know that they are there watching."

It's also important to note at this point that I believe during the course of the investigation there was another suspect by the name of Pat McBride who was a police officer, now as a police officer either he, or friends and/or associates would be privy to information pertaining to surveillance or protection of Cindy and would know to keep away.

It's often been said and Cindy claimed it herself even that it was a group of people doing this to her. It is very possible that one or more members of this group harassing her was a cop.

I can't remember whether this was on the UM segment or if I read it somewhere else, but this is what really has me leaning toward her not making her whole ordeal up:

1- Other people were present when Cindy received the threatening telephone calls.

2- Police had tapped her phone and knew that the threatening calls came in, but they were always too short to trace. (perhaps the caller had knowledge of the time it took for police to trace a call - police involvement?)

I can't remember whether this was on the UM segment or if I read it somewhere else, but this is what really has me leaning toward her not making her whole ordeal up:

1- Other people were present when Cindy received the threatening telephone calls.

2- Police had tapped her phone and knew that the threatening calls came in, but they were always too short to trace. (perhaps the caller had knowledge of the time it took for police to trace a call - police involvement?)

1-Cindy could very well be speaking in the void, talking on the phone while no one was on the side of the phone. None of the witnesses have declared listening on the line and confirming that there was another voice. And even if they had, it is still remotely possible the voice could have been prerecorded, but it would be a long shot.

2-As for tapping, Cindy leaving messages to herself in a faked voice would necessarily be short because she knew she was being tapped and she couldn't risk being traced to a place someone would recognize her been there.

Besides, it is only in Hollywood police shows that "tracing" takes time. In fact it doesn't with unprotected telephones, otherwise private telephone screening wouldn't exist. Hell, I just need to compose *69 here and I'd get the phone number from the last caller almost immediately, and I'm in Canada. Why didn't Cindy do this?

I find very suspicious that the only time she "spoke" with the mystery call she was either alone or with people who couldn't listen on the line, and when police was listening in she only received phone messages.

My take is that they couldn't trace because Cindy was leaving herself threatening messages from some isolated phone booth, once or maybe twice to keep the pressure.The police can only sustain tracing on a phone number for a very limited amount of time. So Cindy had only to wait until the tracing stop before doing it again, make herself a long recorded message (which wasn't traced because it had stopped), and then call the police again in a useless yo-yo.

EDIT: From the segment, the police is adamant that nothing, not even phone calls, not even phone messages, had happened when police officers were listening or staking out. There was simply no phone call to trace at all, so the point is moot.

3-Why would the police cover-up another policeman harassing an innocent woman just for the kicks? This isn't like policemen involved in shady deals or covering up a police blunder, but actively being accomplices to a policeman mentally torturing a woman who wasn't involved in anything criminal until he drives her to suicide, just because he enjoys it. Cui bono?

And we aren't talking about some Columbian country police station with half the police being local thugs or part of a death squad, but the Vancouver police force. I find it hard to believe that a whole set of Vancouver police would let one of them harass an innocent woman for the fun, even with the sleazy police "omertà" on. One of them would squeal to a superior or the Internal Affairs, as they are no benefit in favour of him remaining silent.

[QUOTE=Drakken]

EDIT: From the segment, the police is adamant that nothing, not even phone calls, not even phone messages, had happened when police officers were listening or staking out. There was simply no phone call to trace at all, so the point is moot.


QUOTE]

There were no incidents when the police were physically staking out her home, but Constable (officer) Pat McBride was present for several of the calls Cindy received. At least four phone calls were traced by the phone company. In early 1983, the phone company traced 4 calls that were answered by Cindy, but the calls were too short to trace anything but the exchange. The trace was able to determine the exchange on 3 of the 4 calls and all came from different exchanges. And Detective Boyer-Smyth took one of the "no talk" calls when he was at Cindy's place investigating.

There were other incidents verified or reported by someone other than Cindy.

Once, with Cindy away from home, her downstairs tenant called the police when they heard someone upstairs (in Cindy's part of the rented house). Police investigated but find nothing.

Between Cindy's PI Ozzie Kaban, and her sister Melanie, they answered multiple no talk calls at Cindy's place with Cindy present.

The first two lie detector tests judged Cindy to be, at a minimum, withholding information and rendered conclusions of "not truthful". The third one, however, went Cindy’s way. During that one, she was asked if she staged a recent attack and if she wrote the note that was left at the scene. She answered no to both questions and all of her answers satisfied the police and test administrator; she was judged to be truthful.

Multiple coworkers took calls from men looking for Cindy who wouldn't identify themselves.

Once, Cindy was playing cards late at night with friends when her alarm went off. Her friend was later quoted as saying Cindy was sitting right at the table when the alarm went off. When they researched, they found the glass window of her basement door had been removed.

One of those same friends was present at one of the fires at Cindy’s place. When he went out the front door he found a man in front of the house (at about 2:30 am). The friend asked the stranger to go get help, but the man ran off and was never seen again.

After the last attack (before the murder), a well known knot expert examined the knots from the ligature preserved from her attack. He concluded it to be “highly unlikely” Cindy could have tied herself up.

Now, there is certainly a lot of evidence that points the finger at Cindy, but to insinuate that no one other than Cindy saw any of the harassment is simply not the case.

Ok, after posting that, I just found another video clip I had not seen before. I am reasonably certain that the theory I stated above is plausible, and that police should really take a good long look at Cindy's ex-husband and any connections he may have to any potential drug rings. You have to ask yourself, if the threatening messages that are on Cindy's sister's website came from Cindy's ex, why would he get threatening calls about Cindy? The possible drug connection (which one of those messages implies) makes some sense.

The police originally looked hard at Makepeace, but there was simply no evidence to tie him to the harassment. They interoggated him for hours - nothing. A year of the harassment happened when Cindy and Makepeace were on very good terms, despite them being separated. They dated often during that first year of separation. And years later, during one of her attacks, Makepeace was out of the country. The police were forced to look hard at Makepeace because of the statistical likelihood of an ex-lover being involved; but after more than a half-decade of harassment, there was zero evidence that pointed at Makepeace - nothing.

3-Why would the police cover-up another policeman harassing an innocent woman just for the kicks? This isn't like policemen involved in shady deals or covering up a police blunder, but actively being accomplices to a policeman mentally torturing a woman who wasn't involved in anything criminal until he drives her to suicide, just because he enjoys it. Cui bono?

If it was a police officer involved in drug dealing or some profit motive crime I could understand the coverup. Other cops could benefit form the activities.

But if this was just about an officer harrassing someone, I would think that the police would eventually tell this guy to stop or else.
They wouldn;t arrest him right away, but they would tell him to knock it off.

very good information - you all have done a great job breaking down both sides and I remain completely unsure as to what I believe in this case....