There is one episode of Forensic Files 'Where the Blood Drops', that concerns Susie Mowbray, that I saw again recently and I feel that she absolutely got away with murder.

This was another one of these cases where a husband was shot in bed. There are actually 4-5 other episodes of FFs where wives kill their husbands in bed with almost the exact same set up.

FF presents it as evidence proving her innocence but the real problem is that the prosecution lost both the bedsheet and the shirt her husband was wearing when he was shot. With these things missing, it was basically impossible to prove. The jury foreman read a statement afterwards stating to this, that it was more of a matter of the prosecution failing to prove it's case rather than her innocence. The last interview segment shown she is almost gloating. It's my least favorite episode of Forensic Files.

I saw a few posts on here about where MegTheEgg believes shes innocent but I do not buy it; and yes I had seen the Justice Files episode before as well.

There is another one I cannot remember the name that hinged on a seat belt marking in the case of a step father murdering his step daughter, but I don't remember the details as well. I remember thinking that the evidence all seemed like a red herring.

Anyway, those were a couple I could remember just from Forensic Files. I just wondered if anyone else has any other examples.

The one that comes to mind immediately is the Forensic Files episode of Darlie Routier, "Invisible Intruder." I'm not 100% sold on Darlie's innocence, but I think there's enough doubt and controversy with the case, coupled with the fact that it's been profiled on several other true crime shows. I don't think FF needed to go there.

There is another one I cannot remember the name that hinged on a seat belt marking in the case of a step father murdering his step daughter, but I don't remember the details as well. I remember thinking that the evidence all seemed like a red herring.

The name of the episode is "Picture This." It profiles the 1995 murder of Genna Gamble.

I'm not entirely convinced of Lemuel Smith's guilt in the murder of Donna Payant in the FF episode "Pastoral Care." The physical evidence in the case was extremely weak, amounting to only some blonde hairs in a closet that were microscopically similar to Donna's and what investigators believe is a bitemark on her chest. My main problem with the case is the bitemark evidence. I've tried to convince myself that it's a powerful forensic tool because it's seen in so many cases, but bitemark impressions could be tied to many different people, and there's any number of things that could create a similar mark on a body. Adding to that was the fact Donna's body was found in landfill and could have been damaged during the transportation of her body. Is Lemuel guilty? Probably. But the physical evidence is so weak in my opinion that I find it disheartening that bitemark impressions can be used so easily to convict people. Even Donna's sister isn't convinced Lemuel was to blame.

There's another episode of FF I can't remember the name of where a young girl was found in a death house and investigators found some used gum that had teeth marks on it that matched one of her murderers. I found that pretty convincing but the bitemark on Donna's body was way too vague in my opinion.

The name of the episode is "Picture This." It profiles the 1995 murder of Genna Gamble.

Wasn't there some other evidence about vegetation in the area where the body was found being similar to that which was found underneath her stepfather's car? I could be mixing two cases up. In any event, I thought that particular piece of evidence was pretty weak. The plants named were quite common plants--and found throughout that entire region of the U.S., IIRC.

I'm not sure I can think of any true crime show that got it wrong per se, but there is one FF episode that stands out in my mind in which the victim actually put me off somewhat.

"Bad Blood" was about Dr. John Schneeburger, a physician who sedated and then raped a female patient. When LE went to obtain a blood sample from him for DNA testing, he actually inserted a plastic tube filled with one of his other patient's old blood samples into his own arm and got away with it for almost a decade until his own stepdaughter accused him of drugging and raping HER. LE eventually obtained hair samples from him and compared it to the DNA from the early rape of his patient, and it was a match. Dude went to jail for a number of years and was then deported from Canada back to his native South Africa.

Now, there is absolutely no denying the guy was the epitome of a slimeball, and I think that's probably putting it mildly. I also would not deny a victim the right to be angry about what happened, or to verbalize that anger. But the victim (she was called simply Candy in the interview) had some pretty unsettling things to say, IMO. She called Schneeburger's wife stupid, and said something to the effect of "I thought, you'd better watch out, or it's going to happen to your kids" (and it did, unfortunately). It was almost a see-I-told-you-so kind of vibe, almost a humble-gloat. Then Schneeburger's wife appeared in a very brief interview snippet where she blatantly blamed herself for what happened to her daughter. It was pretty sad.

I want to be clear that I'm certainly not suggesting Candy was implicit in what happened to her or is to blame in any way--FAR from it. She's a victim and deserved justice a LOT earlier than she received it, and she went through hell to get it. But her comments definitely bothered me. Schneeburger's wife had nothing to do with her husband's crimes.

Also, I think that ordeal about Candy's private investigator actually breaking into Schneeburger's car to steal a tube of chapstick for DNA analysis is among the most absurd PI acts I've ever heard of on any true crime show. He DID know he was basically wasting his time collecting inadmissible evidence, right?


On Sue Mowbray, I maintain she's innocent. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

LE eventually obtained hair samples from him and compared it to the DNA from the early rape of his patient, and it was a match.

It was actually a blood sample from his fingertip, but yeah, the DNA matched.

She called Schneeburger's wife stupid, and said something to the effect of "I thought, you'd better watch out, or it's going to happen to your kids" (and it did, unfortunately). It was almost a see-I-told-you-so kind of vibe, almost a humble-gloat. Then Schneeburger's wife appeared in a very brief interview snippet where she blatantly blamed herself for what happened to her daughter. It was pretty sad.

I agree. Her demeanor in the interview has always struck me as a little odd. I don't know if she was just overly excited about doing the interview and wanted to go on national TV and bury the doctor or what her deal was. She swore a couple of times, and there was a point in one version of the episode (I can't remember if it was the original broadcast or what) when she received a call from someone during the interview telling her that the doctor's parole had been denied. It amounted to her, in my opinion, coming off as unprofessional and kind of sensationalistic. I mean, I swear my ass off, but her behavior on national TV just didn't add anything to her credibility. She could have just let the DNA evidence speak for itself.

I did learn an important pharmacology lesson from this case: midazolam (Versed) does NOT cause a memory lapse in all patients. And thank God, otherwise Candy may never have even known what happened to her.

Cold Case Files: "Murder Illustrated", which I talked about in another thread, absolutely got it wrong, so much so they yanked the episode from ever reairing.

20/20 has had numerous heavy-handed, one-sided episodes. The one entitled "Defending Clara Harris" was particular appalling, as it spent the entire hour suggesting her innocence. Um, no. This was the Texas woman who ran over her husband 3 times in a hotel parking lot with her Mercedez-Benz. Even her own daughter testified against her, and she was recorded on camera saying she "wanted to hurt him." She's guilty, she was convicted, and she remains in prison where she belongs.

The Timothy Hennis one was also outrageous. I know this is a hotly debated one, but the episode left out a ton of stuff that could point to Tim's innocence, such as the sketchy history of the eyewitnesses, that there was DNA from an unknown source (and not Hennis) found at the scene of the crimes, and that the lab that "confirmed" Tim's DNA matched was scandal-plagued and a history of skewering results to help prosecutors.

Another Forensic Files episode I've been thinking about recently that I think got it wrong is "Chief Suspect." It's the story of police lieutenant Jim Barton and the murder of his wife Vickie.

Barton came home one day to find his wife sexually assaulted and executed with three gunshots to her head. There was DNA found on her body that didn't match Jim's. His wife had called and told him about a man who came to their house earlier in the day who's car had ran out of gas. Vickie didn't think anything of it but Jim told her she should have pointed a gun at him.

The case went cold until four years later when Gary Henson was arrested on a drug charge. He told investigators that his half brother William Phelps had told him that he and an accomplice were involved. Apparently it was only supposed to be a robbery until the accomplice lost control and raped and murdered Vickie. According to Henson, his half brother never revealed the identity of the accomplice. Phelps killed himself three months after Vickie's death. The DNA found on Vickie's body did not match Henson or Phelps. The DNA could possibly match the DNA of this accomplice.

The case went cold again until the 9-11 call that Barton placed after finding Vickie was analyzed. Investigators were intrigued by a line he said at one point during the call: "I gotta call ___, man." To them, it sounded like he was either saying "for help" or "Phelps."

To me, it sounds like he's saying "for help" but kind of flubbed the words and ended up saying them at the same time, as in "felp." I don't think he's saying "Phelps" because there is no distinct "s" sound at the end. One of the investigators did make a good observation however, in that he was already on the line with a dispatcher so there was no need for him to call "for help," but Barton may have meant that he needed to call for help from his neighbors or someone else close by. Ultimately, the investigators believed he was saying "Phelps."

Gary Henson later told investigators that Barton had hired Phelps to simply scare Vickie into moving to the city instead of the rural area where they lived. Barton wanted the police chief position, but due to some regulation he had to live within the city. Barton was convicted for his part in the murder and ended up serving 11 years in prison, but was recently granted a new trial (http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/crime--law/new-trial-nears-for-springboro-officer-charged-wife-death/2gombbh7JQc0nHe872CgGM/). The conviction was overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct and questions about Henson's testimony.

To my ears, on the 9-11 tape Barton is saying "for help." I think in the end it comes down to the individual listener, but I think the most incriminating piece of evidence that basically just got tossed aside is the DNA. The DNA didn't match Barton or Henson or Phelps and could be tied to the accomplice. Unfortunately that accomplice is unknown. I'm also weary of the testimony of one man who states his now-dead half-brother and an unknown accomplice were involved. It will be interesting to see what comes of this retrial, and I'm curious to know what prosecutorial misconduct was involved in the original investigation.

I did learn an important pharmacology lesson from this case: midazolam (Versed) does NOT cause a memory lapse in all patients. And thank God, otherwise Candy may never have even known what happened to her.

(Apologies for bringing up an old thread)

I can personally vouch for that. I recently had a colonoscopy, and was administered Versed prior to the procedure. I watched the whole thing on the monitor. Kinda cool, actually. :lol:

BTW, I'm new here. :hello :wave:

Welcome! :wave:

I agree that Dateline can be heavy handed in one direction or another. Case in point is the "Mystery In Rock Hill" episode. I had not heard of the case before, and I left the show thinking that Billy Wayne Cope had been railroaded, as the show led me to believe. So I wanted to find out more.

That led me to a website run by the district attorney. I dismissed it at first, thinking it was just malarkey, but they started it in direct response to the Dateline ep. The show briefly touched on past events, saying Billy and his wife had their kids removed before because they "weren't the best housekeepers". That website showed photos of the conditions they were living in, and I cried. It also has hundreds of pages of legal documents, and many things the show did not touch on.

I'm convinced now more than ever that Billy either killed his daughter, or bare minimum, was doing horrible things to her. Dateline apparently figures that since his DNA was not found on his daughter, but someone else's was, that he's automatically innocent of everything. Billy's remaining daughters have nothing good to say about him, and they claim they'd seen the other person involved speaking to their dad before. The fact that Billy was seen furiously deleting files from his computer while they were removing his deceased daughter from their house (after being admonished for it many times by police) tells me he was involved in things that he shouldn't have been.

And anyone who would allow their 3 children to live in abject squalor, with roaches crawling in their hair and backpacks, and covered with bugbites, going to school smelling and filthy, and having buckets and buckets full of feces in your house is not anyone I would just give an automatic pass to. Many have said that they often had utilities shut off (water, heat) but they always had money for internet, and his extremely expensive computer setup was always neat and tidy.

I can't say for sure what role he played in his daughter's death, but I don't believe for a moment he's innocent.

I agree that Dateline can be heavy handed in one direction or another. Case in point is the "Mystery In Rock Hill" episode. I had not heard of the case before, and I left the show thinking that Billy Wayne Cope had been railroaded, as the show led me to believe. So I wanted to find out more.

That led me to a website run by the district attorney. I dismissed it at first, thinking it was just malarkey, but they started it in direct response to the Dateline ep. The show briefly touched on past events, saying Billy and his wife had their kids removed before because they "weren't the best housekeepers". That website showed photos of the conditions they were living in, and I cried. It also has hundreds of pages of legal documents, and many things the show did not touch on.

I'm convinced now more than ever that Billy either killed his daughter, or bare minimum, was doing horrible things to her. Dateline apparently figures that since his DNA was not found on his daughter, but someone else's was, that he's automatically innocent of everything. Billy's remaining daughters have nothing good to say about him, and they claim they'd seen the other person involved speaking to their dad before. The fact that Billy was seen furiously deleting files from his computer while they were removing his deceased daughter from their house (after being admonished for it many times by police) tells me he was involved in things that he shouldn't have been.

And anyone who would allow their 3 children to live in abject squalor, with roaches crawling in their hair and backpacks, and covered with bugbites, going to school smelling and filthy, and having buckets and buckets full of feces in your house is not anyone I would just give an automatic pass to. Many have said that they often had utilities shut off (water, heat) but they always had money for internet, and his extremely expensive computer setup was always neat and tidy.

I can't say for sure what role he played in his daughter's death, but I don't believe for a moment he's innocent.


This happened down the street from me. I had/have and unhealthy obsession with that case ever since I read about it and came across the DA's website you mentioned. It has so much raw documentation it's overwhelming. I definitely cried when I read the autopsy. Amanda Cope's story is by far the darkest and heaviest weights on my mind.

Billy Wayne Cope just recently died a few months ago. He had become a minister of sorts in prison and still had a lot of support from some around here. James Edward Sanders is in prison up in North Carolina.

I can't find this Dateline episode ANYWHERE aside from a bad rip on Internet Archives of all places. It's actually why I joined this forum, seeing if I could find a copy of it.

Like I said, I have a obsession with this case, lol. I've written songs about not being able to get Amanda Cope out of my head. I have one up on youtube if you ever want to hear it, I'll send you a link. :crazy:

I agree that Dateline can be heavy handed in one direction or another. Case in point is the "Mystery In Rock Hill" episode. I had not heard of the case before, and I left the show thinking that Billy Wayne Cope had been railroaded, as the show led me to believe. So I wanted to find out more.

That led me to a website run by the district attorney. I dismissed it at first, thinking it was just malarkey, but they started it in direct response to the Dateline ep. The show briefly touched on past events, saying Billy and his wife had their kids removed before because they "weren't the best housekeepers". That website showed photos of the conditions they were living in, and I cried. It also has hundreds of pages of legal documents, and many things the show did not touch on.


I googled but couldn’t find that website, just either forums discussing the episode or articles talking about how Billy was totally railroaded. I was interested in the district attorney website, because it’d be nice to hear from someone who has actual knowledge of criminal investigation and law enforcement, not just a bunch of armchair detectives.

Did eventually find the website. “Not the best housekeepers” is an extremely mild way of describing the level of squalor regarding the neglect case, sort of like saying, “Lizzie Borden sure had some anger management issues.” Sorry if my comparison was entirely too tasteless, but you do not let your kids live like that no matter how broke you are.

Did eventually find the website. “Not the best housekeepers” is an extremely mild way of describing the level of squalor regarding the neglect case, sort of like saying, “Lizzie Borden sure had some anger management issues.” Sorry if my comparison was entirely too tasteless, but you do not let your kids live like that no matter how broke you are.

Yeah, "not the best housekeepers" was the understatement of the century. I question the mental capacity of his (late) wife. How on Earth do you justify staying in abject filth, in a mobile home (no judgement - I live in one) that has no running water, a bathtub that's fallen through the floor, knee-deep clutter, a communal bowl of beefaroni that's sitting around, unrefrigerated for God knows how long, bare wires, and dozens of OPEN buckets of feces sitting around? Seriously?!?! They should have NEVER gotten the kids back. None of this would have ever happened. I don't recall how long it took for their "new" home to start to look as bad as the old one, but it wasn't relatively long (going by the photos on the site from when they moved in, and then the crime scene photos). Why she didn't take the kids and leave is something that I just can't understand. I mean, they didn't even take the buckets outside and dump them. Just let them sit around after they were full. I was just at a complete and total loss after seeing those.

I googled but couldn’t find that website, just either forums discussing the episode or articles talking about how Billy was totally railroaded. I was interested in the district attorney website, because it’d be nice to hear from someone who has actual knowledge of criminal investigation and law enforcement, not just a bunch of armchair detectives.

I am a bit of an "armchair detective" LMAO but like yourself I do my research, it also helps that I have audited several criminal justice courses and have dated a cop and a detective. The way I approach the evidence presented is as if I was on the jury and if the evidence held my life in the balance. I have not seen this episode but as soon as I heard about it I researched and agree that the guy is hiding something and is guilty of something for sure aside from the horrific neglect he imposed on the kids.:happyface:crazy:

I am a bit of an "armchair detective" LMAO but like yourself I do my research, it also helps that I have audited several criminal justice courses and have dated a cop and a detective. The way I approach the evidence presented is as if I was on the jury and if the evidence held my life in the balance. I have not seen this episode but as soon as I heard about it I researched and agree that the guy is hiding something and is guilty of something for sure aside from the horrific neglect he imposed on the kids.:happyface:crazy:

I'm late, but hi! :wave: We're glad you've joined us!

I think lots of us would describe ourselves as "armchair detectives," myself included. :)

I am happy to see this case mentioned on this thread. Douglas Mouser, more than any subject profiled on Forensic Files as guilty, in my mind seemed to have gotten a raw deal. I am disgusted with this case in general and cannot believe the bad luck that seemed to plague Doug Mouser. I feel for the victim, Genna Gamble, and her loved ones. But I share prominent Modesto attorney Richard Sherman's frustration with the laughable case put on by Birgit Fladager and the total and complete speculation upon which it was based.