I watched this one yet again yesterday, and ended up having a completely different take on it. Perhaps I just missed some things the first couple times around.

-At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

-Doreen's sister mentions that Doreen *did* have an affair years earlier and had even contemplated leaving Stephen, and that she and her husband had to talk Doreen into staying in the marriage. It makes you wonder if Doreen really did run off with this man or another man, possibly to another country. It may also explain why she quit her job.

-Speaking of the sister, not only does she believe in Stephen's innocence, but so does her mother. And FWIW, the sister says all of Stephen's friends believed in his innocence. Can this many people be fooled?

-At first glance, Stephen taking a longer lunch break seems suspicious, but let's analyze this. He took a 70 minute lunch break the day Doreen disappeared, his lunch breaks usually took 20-30 minutes. Therefore, his lunch break that day was an hour and ten minutes and slightly longer than twice as long as normal. There were no signs of a struggle at their house.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

For most of the last 10 years, I thought he was guilty, but that's a lot of nagging questions.

At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

Without trying to start a war, I would point out that O.J. Simpson very famously offered a reward to find "the real killer" of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Scott Peterson took part in the numerous searches for Laci. For those of us who have bickered on the Kurt Cobain thread, Courtney Love hired a private investigator (who now totally thinks she murdered Cobain.) I don't necessarily think that hiring an investigator is proof of innocence.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

I don't know if you've listened to Serial, but a jury determined that Adnan Syad was able to kill his ex-girlfriend, drive across town, and bury the body in less time than that. It only takes a minute of so to strangle someone to death. I'm not a forensic pathologist, but I would venture a guess that Doreen was killed via strangulation after an argument with Stephen. Quick, personal, and no big bloody mess to clean up. I think it's entirely possible he could have done this in less than an hour.

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

Maybe I'm mixing up segments or the plot of a bad detective movie, but didn't the typewritten note have a jumping "o"? And when they got a sample from the typewriter at his mother's house, it had the same jumping "o"?


-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

That's a tougher question, but I would point you to a lot of cases where the killers have implicated themselves for one reason or another. I think you just highlighted a Charley Project case on another thread where it's believed that a young softball player was killed by an umpire who played softball with her. I only skimmed the profile, but it seemed that he had been calling attention to himself for quite some time and throwing around hints that he had killed her.

Perhaps Stephen did this in an attempt to draw attention off of himself, hoping that law enforcement would ask the same questions: WHY would Stephen write the letter implicating himself? I agree, it doesn't make much sense. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. At the end of his life, Stephen Marfeo did a lot of things that didn't make sense.

I think you raise a lot of good points, Wiseguy. In the end, though, I'm still voting guilty.

Solid points by both of you on this. I never did find it odd that Stephen would type up that letter. Only because all he would have to tell detectives is, "why in the world would I type a letter implicating myself?".

I think the biggest red flag on him is that he shot his girlfriend years later and then killed himself.

Solid points by both of you on this. I never did find it odd that Stephen would type up that letter. Only because all he would have to tell detectives is, "why in the world would I type a letter implicating myself?".

I think the biggest red flag on him is that he shot his girlfriend years later and then killed himself.

Yeah, those are some good points in favour of Stephen and I would definitely feel a lot more ambiguous about his guilt if it wasn't for the murder-suicide nine years later.

By comparison, even though I used to think Paul Pollis was 100 % guilty, there have been plenty of valid points brought up on this board which make me think his case isn't as cut-and-dried as it appears. Of course, Paul has had a ton of trouble with the law following his wife's disappearance. You can either interpret his self-destructive lifestyle as being the result of massive guilt over his wife's death, or being driven to the breaking point by all the false accusations he's had to face. But the key difference between Paul Pollis and Stephen Marfeo is that Paul's crimes have all been related to drugs and embezzlement and I don't believe he's ever had any documented incidents of violence. It just seems like a huge stretch that a completely innocent man could be falsely accused of murdering his wife and then react by REALLY murdering his girlfriend years later.

The odds of that seem pretty miniscule, though I'm actually curious if there are many documented cases of a situation like that happening...

Re: Stephen's 70-minute lunch break

I'm not sure Stephen would have necessarily had to have committed the crime, cleaned up, and staged the scene all within that 70-minute time span. I think it's possible he could have killed Doreen, left her in the home, and later returned after work to complete "the job". In fact, I strongly think a similar scenario is likely what occurred in the Christi Nichols case. I think Mark Nichols killed his wife (intentionally or unintentionally), and then disposed of her body the next day after rushing their children over to Christi's grandmother's house.
I could envision something much like this occurring in this case.

Bringing this over from another thread about Stephen (Yes, I'm quoting myself because that's how I roll.)



I'm not entirely convinced Stephen killed Doreen. I think he knew more than he was saying, but I'm not convinced he killed her.

A few things: The type written letters were analyzed by a Dr. Murray Miron in the psychology department at Syracuse University. Dr Miron's bad analysis of David Koresh's writing played a big part in the fiasco that was Waco.

Check out this link:
https://books.google.com/books?id=WJ...racuse&f=false

In addition to this, at this time, Syracuse's psychology/education department was in the middle of a "breakthrough" that would eventually turn into a heartbreaking fraud for thousands of parents: facilitated communication for severe autism. Heralded by Syracuse as a wonder, proper scientific method was ignored and eventually facilitated communication was discredited in most cases.


I'd also be very curious to know Stephen's father's name. That may hold a clue to what happened if he didn't kill Doreen.

Did anyone else find it interesting that none of Stephen's family appeared on camera?

It is Rhode Island. It is possible there are reasons his family didn't want to appear on camera. Marfeo is a little bit of a famous last name in certain circles in Rhode Island/Boston/Eastern CT.

Read this.
http://americanmafia.com/Cities/New_...rovidence.html

He did it without a doubt in my mind but everyone in entitled to their opinions.

The change in behavior. He had his wife followed for no reason other than he's paranoid and had to know her every move and then he doesn't report her missing for 3 days. ? People don't change their deep ingrained patterns of behavior over night like that.

In regards to Doreen's family, if they believed he was guilty that would mean that had to accept she was not only murdered but that they might never find her remains. Some people would rather live in denial as its too overpowering emotionally to accept the other scenario. Also the episode was filmed almost 25 years ago. Who knows what opinion (especially after his murder-suicide of his girlfriend) Doreen's family has now.

The acts Stephan committed years later again goes back to the same pattern of deep ingrained behaviors and thinking. Unless somebody undergoes intense and consistent behavioral therapy for an extended period of time (they would have to acknowledge they have a problem in the first place) its extremely unlikely these patterns would just disappear or that If Stephan was a rational and emotionally healthy man when Doreen disappeared but then committed those atrocious acts he later did it doesn't fit. He was disturbed then and was when he killed again IMO.

-Marfeo did not report his wife missing for two days.

-Marfeo claimed to be the last person seen alive with Doreen.

-Doreen left without her toothbrush, her pets, and her car. There was also no money missing (over $50,000) in the Marfeo's bank accounts.

-Marfeo hired a PI to follow Doreen around which resulted in no evidence that she was being unfaithful.

-Doreen quit her job to work on her marriage.

He did it.

The change in behavior. He had his wife followed for no reason other than he's paranoid and had to know her every move and then he doesn't report her missing for 3 days. ? People don't change their deep ingrained patterns of behavior over night like that.

I agree, it does seem odd he would have his wife followed by two private investigators. But, I think there might be a rational explanation for that. The segment mentions Doreen was suffering from what seemed like panic attacks in the middle of the night, and she seemed like she was on the edge of a nervous breakdown, but never revealed much info about that to Stephen. I think perhaps Stephen was concerned about her and that she was trying to hide something from him, and that could be the reason for the private investigators.

In regards to Doreen's family, if they believed he was guilty that would mean that had to accept she was not only murdered but that they might never find her remains. Some people would rather live in denial as its too overpowering emotionally to accept the other scenario. Also the episode was filmed almost 25 years ago. Who knows what opinion (especially after his murder-suicide of his girlfriend) Doreen's family has now.

Not to get too technical, but Doreen disappeared 25 years ago, the segment was filmed 3 years after her disappearance.

Without trying to start a war, I would point out that O.J. Simpson very famously offered a reward to find "the real killer" of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Scott Peterson took part in the numerous searches for Laci. For those of us who have bickered on the Kurt Cobain thread, Courtney Love hired a private investigator (who now totally thinks she murdered Cobain.) I don't necessarily think that hiring an investigator is proof of innocence.

I've always scratched my head, wondering how Kurt Cobain, who essentially pioneered an entire genre of music, ended up with a musical footnote like Courtney Love.

I don't know if you've listened to Serial, but a jury determined that Adnan Syad was able to kill his ex-girlfriend, drive across town, and bury the body in less time than that. It only takes a minute of so to strangle someone to death. I'm not a forensic pathologist, but I would venture a guess that Doreen was killed via strangulation after an argument with Stephen. Quick, personal, and no big bloody mess to clean up. I think it's entirely possible he could have done this in less than an hour.

But wouldn't Stephen have scratches and stuff? He went back to work. Also, this probably means Stephen loaded her up in his car, rode around with the body, and dumped her all in broad daylight, with nobody seeing it?


Maybe I'm mixing up segments or the plot of a bad detective movie, but didn't the typewritten note have a jumping "o"? And when they got a sample from the typewriter at his mother's house, it had the same jumping "o"?

I honestly have never heard of that, but even if it's true, could Stephen's mother or somebody else with access to it type the letter?

I think you raise a lot of good points, Wiseguy.

Thanks.

Okay so now he is dead so if she ran away why not come out of hiding all these years? I'm sorry but she is dead and he killed her.

He stuck me as a possessive husband. He had plenty of time to get rid of evidence, clean up any signs of a struggle and hide her body.

8 times of 10 when a wife or husband goes missing or is killed the spouse did it. Those are pretty staggering odds.

I've not seen this segment in a few months but I'm cleaning out my DVR. I think I have about 30 left to watch. I'm trying to see the Mary cases but so far I'm having no luck. I wish I'd know about the DVD sets years ago but I was working 2 jobs then.

Why do think he got rid of her body that day? He had plenty of time to dispose of her later that night.

Where do all these missing spouses go? I think we could all name over 20 spouses missing who husbands are prime suspects but the bodies have never been found. Sure is puzzling.....

Why do think he got rid of her body that day? He had plenty of time to dispose of her later that night.

Where do all these missing spouses go? I think we could all name over 20 spouses missing who husbands are prime suspects but the bodies have never been found. Sure is puzzling.....
I can't speak to Connecticut specifically. I've lived in either the suburbs of New Jersey or Pennsylvania my entire life, but I have traveled to 34 of our 50 states, and time again I'm amazed at how rural certain places can be.

There's a stretch of US Highway (really think its US Highway 160) on the way to Four Corners in the southwest that as I drove past a small scattering of houses to the Four Corners site, myself & my travelling companion thought where do these folks grocery shop? how far's the closest trauma center if there's a bad accident out this way? where do their kids go to school? On a different trip I was driving in Wyoming and drove past a sign that welcomed me to Emblem, and informed me the population of the town was a grand total of 10 and found myself asking the same questions. Heck the entire state of Wyoming has about 620,000 people. The city of Philadelphia has over 1.5 million residents.

So IMHO, it is possible that a spouse could kill another spouse, hide the body, & tragically, the body never be found. Allow me to also point out I'm a geography geek, so please don't think me too harsh, it's just one of the things I'm a little passionate about.

I watched this one yet again yesterday, and ended up having a completely different take on it. Perhaps I just missed some things the first couple times around.

-At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

-Doreen's sister mentions that Doreen *did* have an affair years earlier and had even contemplated leaving Stephen, and that she and her husband had to talk Doreen into staying in the marriage. It makes you wonder if Doreen really did run off with this man or another man, possibly to another country. It may also explain why she quit her job.

-Speaking of the sister, not only does she believe in Stephen's innocence, but so does her mother. And FWIW, the sister says all of Stephen's friends believed in his innocence. Can this many people be fooled?

-At first glance, Stephen taking a longer lunch break seems suspicious, but let's analyze this. He took a 70 minute lunch break the day Doreen disappeared, his lunch breaks usually took 20-30 minutes. Therefore, his lunch break that day was an hour and ten minutes and slightly longer than twice as long as normal. There were no signs of a struggle at their house.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

For most of the last 10 years, I thought he was guilty, but that's a lot of nagging questions.
I've always thought he was guilty. Didn't it come out later that he beat and killed another woman then killed himself? I would need to watch this again for all of the details so I can't really comment on those.

Families can side with him and they were probably fond of him and that does hold a lot of weight. In some cases that would be enough to change my mind..but not this one. I would be curious if any of the family members have since changed their minds.

As far as him seeking out people....other killers have done this. didn't tim mclure do that(and even acted as himself LOL!!)

and the circleville writer. who else did this on UM? I'm sure there are plenty more.

Re: Stephen's 70-minute lunch break

I'm not sure Stephen would have necessarily had to have committed the crime, cleaned up, and staged the scene all within that 70-minute time span. I think it's possible he could have killed Doreen, left her in the home, and later returned after work to complete "the job". In fact, I strongly think a similar scenario is likely what occurred in the Christi Nichols case. I think Mark Nichols killed his wife (intentionally or unintentionally), and then disposed of her body the next day after rushing their children over to Christi's grandmother's house.
I could envision something much like this occurring in this case.
good point. the longer lunch break definitely is an eyebrow raiser. and Mark Nichols knowing the entire contents of Christi's bag that she allegedly packed kind of nails that one for me.

-At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it. .

But what about Tim McClure? We know he went on television to publicize the case.

Not to mention, there is no harm in paying investigators, offering rewards, and going to such lengths if he knows the true outcome won't ever surface. It's also beneficial because it takes the focus off of him.


-Doreen's sister mentions that Doreen *did* have an affair years earlier and had even contemplated leaving Stephen, and that she and her husband had to talk Doreen into staying in the marriage. It makes you wonder if Doreen really did run off with this man or another man, possibly to another country. It may also explain why she quit her job.

For me, it's not unlike other segments where a spouse disappears and one possible theory is that they took off either because they were in another clandestine relationship (e.g., Christi Nichols, Ceceilia Newball, Pam Page) or wanted to start a new life (e.g., Dottie Caylor). At the time of the initial disappearances and the creation and airing of the UM segments, these theories might seem semi-credible. However, the fact that none of these women ever materialized in any way, shape, or form over the years tells me that they are probably dead. I think Doreen Marfeo fits too.

As for the leaving her job, I thought that maybe it was an attempt to "break away" and start a new life. And I don't mean that in a clandestine run off type way, but more in a "I'm going to stand up for myself, cut ties with the negative things in my life and forge a new and more pleasing path" kinda way. Along those lines, I also wonder if she was contemplating leaving Stephen as well, and that may have led to some arguments. I think it's possible.


-Speaking of the sister, not only does she believe in Stephen's innocence, but so does her mother. And FWIW, the sister says all of Stephen's friends believed in his innocence. Can this many people be fooled?

By that logic too, Tim McClure must be innocent.

-At first glance, Stephen taking a longer lunch break seems suspicious, but let's analyze this. He took a 70 minute lunch break the day Doreen disappeared, his lunch breaks usually took 20-30 minutes. Therefore, his lunch break that day was an hour and ten minutes and slightly longer than twice as long as normal. There were no signs of a struggle at their house.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

Others have pointed this out already, but I don't think he would have had to accomplish everything within the 70 minute window. If he did kill her, either accidentally or pre-meditated (I'd have to watch the segment again to decide which), he could have just killed her during his lunch break and cleaned up and disposed of the body later on.

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

It's funny you mention the ribbons because I had wondered about that too. Since...

1. If the ribbon hadn't been changed, the exact contents of the notes would be there.
2. How many people would think to change the ribbon?

I do recall the detective on the segment saying that the typewriter identification was almost like a fingerprint. Admittedly, I know little of typewriters, but the fingerprint comment got me thinking....

Here is a link that explains the workings of typewriters...

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/typewriter.html

Just envisioning the typewriter, I'm wondering if the "type hammer" may have lines and grooves in it (like in fingerprints) that are unique due to imperfections in the manufacturing process. Now, I'm just guessing, but if this is true, I could see how it would be traceable because there would be differences in the printing from typewriter to typewriter given whatever imperfections exist in the type hammers that would be detectable in ink from anything written on the same machine.

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

I always figured it was more subterfuge. It could also be some odd attempt to get it "off his chest." A similar case that comes to mind if the Mikki Jo West disappearance. The police speculated that her killer wrote those letters in which he implicated himself.

But what about Tim McClure? We know he went on television to publicize the case.

I'm glad you brought up McClure. I was contemplating starting a thread based off of the demeanor of people featured in either the Final Appeal segments, or the Missing/Unexplained Death segments that featured spouses/loved ones. Compare McClure's answers ("I don't know why but I flunked the test") and demeanor to others featured like Lenny Rizzo, Mark Nichols, and Stephen Marfeo. Marfeo comes off as smug and arrogant, Nichols is trying his best to stay awake, and Rizzo just seems so flipping nervous it comes off as laughable. Everyone is different, but in the history f UM has there ever been a person who was willing to go on national television and admit that they failed a polygraph, didn't have a corroborated alibi, etc.?

Not to mention, there is no harm in paying investigators, offering rewards, and going to such lengths if he knows the true outcome won't ever surface. It's also beneficial because it takes the focus off of him.

Susan Smith comes to mind.

For me, it's not unlike other segments where a spouse disappears and one possible theory is that they took off either because they were in another clandestine relationship (e.g., Christi Nichols, Ceceilia Newball, Pam Page) or wanted to start a new life (e.g., Dottie Caylor). At the time of the initial disappearances and the creation and airing of the UM segments, these theories might seem semi-credible. However, the fact that none of these women ever materialized in any way, shape, or form over the years tells me that they are probably dead. I think Doreen Marfeo fits too.

100% right on.

During the filming of these segments we are talking about months and maybe 1-2 years since the disappearance. These missing spouses featured on UM who have never resurfaced are dead. There's no two ways around it.

By that logic too, Tim McClure must be innocent.

Or Larry Race since his dead wife's parents believed in his innocence. Or Stuart Heaton. Or Jeffrey MacDonald. Or Darlie Routier.

Just envisioning the typewriter, I'm wondering if the "type hammer" may have lines and grooves in it (like in fingerprints) that are unique due to imperfections in the manufacturing process. Now, I'm just guessing, but if this is true, I could see how it would be traceable because there would be differences in the printing from typewriter to typewriter given whatever imperfections exist in the type hammers that would be detectable in ink from anything written on the same machine.

They do and they are very similar to fingerprints. I inherited an old typewriter from my grandmother back in the mid-90's when she died and was told this when I attempted to get it repaired. Some machines have hammers that are quicker than others and leave a better impression on paper when pressing a certain key, this is another way to determine which specific typewriter was used to type something.

I always figured it was more subterfuge. It could also be some odd attempt to get it "off his chest." A similar case that comes to mind if the Mikki Jo West disappearance. The police speculated that her killer wrote those letters in which he implicated himself.

Jule Caylor too. I think these guys are doing this for two reasons: built up guilt for what they did, and a half-assed way to shift focus away from them. Especially in Marfeo's case since he actually named himself in the letters.

mcclure is probably the most obvious other case where he seeked out UM and even did his telephone scene with the old turn dials and a cig?....:rolleyes:

mcclure is probably the most obvious other case where he seeked out UM and even did his telephone scene with the old turn dials and a cig?....:rolleyes:

I liked the ominous music that was playing during the re-enacment of supposedly "happy times" of McClure and his mother playing slots together.

I liked the ominous music that was playing during the re-enacment of supposedly "happy times" of McClure and his mother playing slots together.
haha I'll have to check that one

I suspect the murder occurred during the 70 minute lunch break. Perhaps Doreen said she was finished with Stephen and it just wasn't going to work. Perhaps they had a huge fight. I think he snapped. And like Meg said, I think it was later that he took the time to clean up and hide the body.

However, I can see why people are questioning his guilt, and wiseguy brought up some great points. But I think ultimately Stephen's kindness to Doreen's family, media spending, and letter writing was all a ploy to look innocent. Because a guilty man wouldn't really do these things, would he? I think this was the psychology that Stephen exploited to remain in the Dobson family's good graces. Even after his death, Doreen's mother believed him innocent.

But what about Tim McClure? We know he went on television to publicize the case.

Not to mention, there is no harm in paying investigators, offering rewards, and going to such lengths if he knows the true outcome won't ever surface. It's also beneficial because it takes the focus off of him.

Nothing Tim McClure did made any sense to me. No idea what goes on through that mind.

I wouldn't say there was no harm, it obviously took a financial toll on him.

For me, it's not unlike other segments where a spouse disappears and one possible theory is that they took off either because they were in another clandestine relationship (e.g., Christi Nichols, Ceceilia Newball, Pam Page) or wanted to start a new life (e.g., Dottie Caylor). At the time of the initial disappearances and the creation and airing of the UM segments, these theories might seem semi-credible. However, the fact that none of these women ever materialized in any way, shape, or form over the years tells me that they are probably dead. I think Doreen Marfeo fits too.

But we know for a fact Doreen had an affair. I don't think it's that far-fetched.

As for the leaving her job, I thought that maybe it was an attempt to "break away" and start a new life. And I don't mean that in a clandestine run off type way, but more in a "I'm going to stand up for myself, cut ties with the negative things in my life and forge a new and more pleasing path" kinda way. Along those lines, I also wonder if she was contemplating leaving Stephen as well, and that may have led to some arguments. I think it's possible.

But how does quitting her job tie in with Stephen? If anything, her job would give her a chance to escape any ugliness in their marriage, as well as providing her with a means to support herself should she leave Stephen. And that she quit her job so abruptly may have ruined any chance for re-hire.

By that logic too, Tim McClure must be innocent.

Wow, another Tim McClure reference. Respectfully Justin, I'm just confused how you went from being so sure he was guilty (to the point of poking fun at our moderator for believing in his innocence) to doing a complete 180.

But I think you're comparing apples and oranges here. With Stephen, I was talking about his in-laws. It's quite common for people to have frosty relationships with their in-laws, so for Stephen's mother-in-law to believe in his innocence up until the day he died is really something. And apparently, Tim's family changed their tune on him. (although, since *everything* is questioned on this forum nowadays, I'm not at all surprised Toni Kells's statement is being questioned).

Others have pointed this out already, but I don't think he would have had to accomplish everything within the 70 minute window. If he did kill her, either accidentally or pre-meditated (I'd have to watch the segment again to decide which), he could have just killed her during his lunch break and cleaned up and disposed of the body later on.

What I'd be interested in knowing is if Stephen had any scratches on him that day or if he acted strangely. That may be the key to the whole mystery right there. It seems like the segment would have mentioned it.

I always figured it was more subterfuge.

I think whoever typed the letter was worried about it being traced back to them, so they typed the other letter (which was completely different from the first) to throw off investigators. The question is, who did this and why?

I've always thought he was guilty. Didn't it come out later that he beat and killed another woman then killed himself? I would need to watch this again for all of the details so I can't really comment on those.

That's true, but why not confess then if he killed Doreen? It's not like people would have thought that much differently of him if he was a quadruple murderer instead of "just" a triple murderer. (I know he didn't 'finish the job' on the boyfriend, but I'll still count that one anyway)

I suspect the murder occurred during the 70 minute lunch break. Perhaps Doreen said she was finished with Stephen and it just wasn't going to work. Perhaps they had a huge fight. I think he snapped. And like Meg said, I think it was later that he took the time to clean up and hide the body.

However, I can see why people are questioning his guilt, and wiseguy brought up some great points.

Thanks.

One thing that sticks out for me: if there was abuse from Stephen inflicted on Doreen and she was worried he was going to snap, would she break off the marriage while they were alone in the privacy of their own home? I mean, it's kind of like Dottie and Jule Caylor. If Dottie was so terrified of Jule and believed he was going to kill her and there was all this abuse, why would she voluntarily be alone with him when there was no reason to?

That's true, but why not confess then if he killed Doreen? It's not like people would have thought that much differently of him if he was a quadruple murderer instead of "just" a triple murderer. (I know he didn't 'finish the job' on the boyfriend, but I'll still count that one anyway)

Maybe because of her family? I know they all believed he was innocent. Maybe he didn't want their perception of him to change? Just a guess.

I don't think trying to put rational thought in someone who just committed a murder (almost double) and is about to kill themselves is going to make much sense. Why would he confess? He committed suicide because he knew he would be caught for this one and he didn't want to take responsibility for his actions. He was all about his own needs and nobody else. There have been many suspected murderers who later committed suicide but never left a note saying where their victims body was located. It's always about them never their victim(s).

I don't think trying to put rational thought in someone who just committed a murder (almost double) and is about to kill themselves is going to make much sense. Why would he confess? He committed suicide because he knew he would be caught for this one and he didn't want to take responsibility for his actions. He was all about his own needs and nobody else. There have been many suspected murderers who later committed suicide but never left a note saying where their victims body was located. It's always about them never their victim(s).
Very true. I think we always try to rationalize why someone kills others or themselves because it doesn't make sense to most of us. This guy clearly had issues and was a repeat offender that likely would have done this to every woman that he got close to. As you say I think he did what he wanted to do at the time. As far as his suicide I agree with you as well and I also speculate he lived with guilt for a long time and after his second ordeal he couldn't take it anymore.

Nothing Tim McClure did made any sense to me. No idea what goes on through that mind.

Okay, so in the McClure case you think he's guilty, but he went on television to publicize the case and it is unexplainable.

However, in the Marfeo case (whom you seem to believe is innocent), he went on television to publicize the case and it supporting evidence of his innocence.

Is this correct?

I wouldn't say there was no harm, it obviously took a financial toll on him.

Sure, but when the alternative is being thought of as a suspect in a serious crime, possibly being charged and convicted and going to prison, or worse getting a death sentence, it makes all the sense in the world to do what you can to show your "innocence."

But we know for a fact Doreen had an affair. I don't think it's that far-fetched.

Right, but the point was that she never surfaced again in the 20 plus years. So where is she?

But how does quitting her job tie in with Stephen? If anything, her job would give her a chance to escape any ugliness in their marriage, as well as providing her with a means to support herself should she leave Stephen. And that she quit her job so abruptly may have ruined any chance for re-hire.

I'll have to re-watch. I'm fuzzy on it.

Wow, another Tim McClure reference. Respectfully Justin, I'm just confused how you went from being so sure he was guilty (to the point of poking fun at our moderator for believing in his innocence) to doing a complete 180.

Crystaldawn is a friend of mine and we would occasionally tease each other, albeit in a good natured way, about our respective beliefs on certain cases. That's really all this was.

As to why my beliefs changed, I have thought about this long and hard because I legitimately want to answer the question and do so in a way that you'll understand. The best I can say is that I saw that segment when I was a kid and I thought he was guilty because that is the picture the segment paints and I didn't sit and think about it in any depth after I turned the TV off. As an adult, I've had more life experience, become more thoughtful, less credulous, and more skeptical of UM's presentations. That's not to belittle any adults who think he's guilty, just that my thinking has changed as I've matured and the cognitive lenses through which I viewed things changed over time.

When you really look at the evidence, there isn't anything there, IMO. And since the burden is on the criminal justice system to prove a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, it is not up to a defendant to prove they are innocent. That is not what the system is about. Yet, the segment is set up to paint McClure as guilty and in a hole that he needs to dig himself out of, and frankly, he fails in his attempts to do so.

ETA: This just came to me. It's like trying to prove a negative. Logic dictates that you can't do this. I think that is why McClure is at a disadvantage in the segment. The segment is structured in such a way that he has to prove he didn't kill his mother. Yet, he can't do that.

But I think you're comparing apples and oranges here. With Stephen, I was talking about his in-laws. It's quite common for people to have frosty relationships with their in-laws, so for Stephen's mother-in-law to believe in his innocence up until the day he died is really something. And apparently, Tim's family changed their tune on him. (although, since *everything* is questioned on this forum nowadays, I'm not at all surprised Toni Kells's statement is being questioned).

But the in-laws have a vested interest in believing she is alive because she is their daughter. To believe Stephen Marfeo is guilty is to believe she is dead, right?

I think whoever typed the letter was worried about it being traced back to them, so they typed the other letter (which was completely different from the first) to throw off investigators. The question is, who did this and why?

Were both letters written on the same machine? I thought they were. In any event, I tend to think both were written by the same person. Didn't a profiler on the segment suspect this too, and also proffer that Marfeo wrote the letters?

That's true, but why not confess then if he killed Doreen? It's not like people would have thought that much differently of him if he was a quadruple murderer instead of "just" a triple murderer. (I know he didn't 'finish the job' on the boyfriend, but I'll still count that one anyway)
I think in the end yea you are right when you look back now. But at the time that this case was current he was trying to go on living out his life and preserving his reputation. That's my guess...

Either way what's the difference as you pointed out whether he murdered one two three etc. he's a jerk and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people. Why spend too much of our time debating whether he's innocent of this or that? I see your side though. I think given the data that we have most would think that he is guilty.

Either way what's the difference as you pointed out whether he murdered one two three etc. he's a jerk and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people. Why waste our time debating whether he's innocent of this or that. I think given the data that we have most would think that he is guilty.

I agree that Marfeo is most likely guilty, but I just want to caution that debating stuff like that is par the course for the forum. It's what we do here. Technically, so many of these cases are "done" so far as the legal system and most of the parties involved are concerned, but we still enjoy discussing them and I think that's in the spirit of the forum.

Found an article about Doreen/Stephen after Marfeo killed his ex girlfriend and it had this tidbit about Doreen's mom, "The victim's mother, Laura Dobson ultimately came to believe that Stephen Marfeo killed her daughter."

Went on to detail how Marfeo would repeatedly call the mother's house to check in on Doreen when she went to visit her.

I agree that Marfeo is most likely guilty, but I just want to caution that debating stuff like that is par the course for the forum. It's what we do here. Technically, so many of these cases are "done" so far as the legal system and most of the parties involved are concerned, but we still enjoy discussing them and I think that's in the spirit of the forum.
I agree I pretty much instantly edited my statement because I knew I would get this reply. And you are right it's not a waste of time. Poor choice of words on my part and wiseguy you did bring up some good points to start a good discussion.

Found an article about Doreen/Stephen after Marfeo killed his ex girlfriend and it had this tidbit about Doreen's mom, "The victim's mother, Laura Dobson ultimately came to believe that Stephen Marfeo killed her daughter."

Went on to detail how Marfeo would repeatedly call the mother's house to check in on Doreen when she went to visit her.
Interesting

I had a feeling her family had eventually come to the conclusion Stephan murdered Doreen. Doreen's sister's demeanor on the UM segment showed to me just how desperate she was to believe her sister was still alive. She was grasping at straws to me.

She had mentioned Doreen had contemplated leaving Stephan for another man 10 years prior (she would have been only 23 or 24 years old) Doreen and Stephan weren't married back then, just dating. Also, during the time she was seeing somebody else/contemplating leaving Stephan she never cut off contact with her family and disappeared. So, that whole incident to me was just hope her family clung to that she had just fled a bad marriage and would eventually reach out to them. However, for Doreen to never reach out to her family for 25 years even after Stephan's murder/suicide, I think they know now 1) how truly disturbed Stephan was and 2)that he murdered her.

Lastly, on the Charlie Projects website about Doreen it says that Stephan did leave a suicide note to his mother that expressed guilt about Doreen's disappearance but never specifically said what happened or a body's location. That reminds me of the accountant Dennis Gerwing on Disappeared who committed suicide and left a rambling suicide note that seemed to hint at guilt but never actually said what happened or where the Calvert's bodies were.

Personally, I love the debates that take place on the boards. I think it's really interesting how we all differ in our opinions from case to case. For example, I know that TheCars and I usually share the same perspective on cases, but then completely differ on one particular case. I think the discussion of possible scenarios are part of the whole reason these boards have maintained themselves for as long as they have.

But back to Marfeo-- I also had the same thought about the typewriter ribbon that a previous poster brought up. I learned to type on a typewriter and remember this about the ribbon-- you can see the impression of each letter in the ink ribbon as you type. Obviously, the note would be impressed into the ribbon backwards, but you could still put it together. I'm willing to speculate that law enforcement DID pull the ribbon and was able to conclude it came from that particular typewriter, but this information was not released to the general public. However, it does not prove that STEPHEN himself wrote the note, as Wiseguy pointed out.

His hiring of a P.I., the constant calling to "check up on her," it reeks of someone who is incredibly controlling. Part of me wonders if the murder happened because Stephen came from for lunch and caught Doreen packing her stuff, trying to make a hasty exit out of there.

Personally, I love the debates that take place on the boards. I think it's really interesting how we all differ in our opinions from case to case. For example, I know that TheCars and I usually share the same perspective on cases, but then completely differ on one particular case. I think the discussion of possible scenarios are part of the whole reason these boards have maintained themselves for as long as they have.


Another excellent point. I'm glad the boards are rolling and recently have been excellent and stronger than ever!

Personally, I love the debates that take place on the boards. I think it's really interesting how we all differ in our opinions from case to case. For example, I know that TheCars and I usually share the same perspective on cases, but then completely differ on one particular case. I think the discussion of possible scenarios are part of the whole reason these boards have maintained themselves for as long as they have.

Excellent point. I completely agree.

Out of curiosity, which case do you two disagree on?

Excellent point. I completely agree.

Out of curiosity, which case do you two disagree on?

Tim McClure. :)

Okay, so in the McClure case you think he's guilty, but he went on television to publicize the case and it is unexplainable.

However, in the Marfeo case (whom you seem to believe is innocent), he went on television to publicize the case and it supporting evidence of his innocence.

Is this correct?

Well, not really. I have never stated I believe Stephen Marfeo is innocent. Up until yesterday, I have believed he was guilty for nearly 10 years. But I made the post yesterday, stating "Is there a chance Stephen Marfeo is guilty?" and at the end of the post, said "that's a lot of nagging questions." I guess you could say I'm on the fence at this point.

With Tim McClure, every single thing he did doesn't make sense to me. I don't know why he gambled alone at his wedding night, looked for a purse he didn't know was missing, etc.

As to why my beliefs changed, I have thought about this long and hard because I legitimately want to answer the question and do so in a way that you'll understand. The best I can say is that I saw that segment when I was a kid and I thought he was guilty because that is the picture the segment paints and I didn't sit and think about it in any depth after I turned the TV off. As an adult, I've had more life experience, become more thoughtful, less credulous, and more skeptical of UM's presentations. That's not to belittle any adults who think he's guilty, just that my thinking has changed as I've matured and the cognitive lenses through which I viewed things changed over time.

When you really look at the evidence, there isn't anything there, IMO. And since the burden is on the criminal justice system to prove a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, it is not up to a defendant to prove they are innocent. That is not what the system is about. Yet, the segment is set up to paint McClure as guilty and in a hole that he needs to dig himself out of, and frankly, he fails in his attempts to do so.

ETA: This just came to me. It's like trying to prove a negative. Logic dictates that you can't do this. I think that is why McClure is at a disadvantage in the segment. The segment is structured in such a way that he has to prove he didn't kill his mother. Yet, he can't do that.

Fair enough, but I know it's been said on here that the segment "didn't do any favors" to Tim, which I don't understand. I mean, they took his case after all, and let him speak his peace. I don't understand how they didn't do him any favors.

Were both letters written on the same machine? I thought they were. In any event, I tend to think both were written by the same person. Didn't a profiler on the segment suspect this too, and also proffer that Marfeo wrote the letters?

The segment didn't come right out and say they were typed on the same machine, but it's heavily implied. There was a profiler on the segment who believed Stephen typed both letters, but didn't offer much in the way of why he thought that way.

Tim McClure. :)

^ Which she and wiseguy and I totally agree on as well, although I too usually am with Cars on many cases. Except Larry Race. I think wiseguy and I are together on that one too, though. And no one that I know of on the board shares my doubts about the Paul Ferrell case.

It's also funny how you remember who you're allied with on all these discussions. :)

I live a pretty rural area myself so I can imagine that hiding a body isn't that hard but it does seem that alot of people go missing and not a trace of them is found. With development of land some are found though. A lake in my town in a severe drought bought a car out the water with a missing woman from the 70's (this was back in the 90's I think). Her brother killed her and dumped the car with her body. He inherited a large estate that he would have had to split with his sister.

I've heard stories on UM of bodies dumped into mine shafts.IE...Robert Weeks's missing lovers, Laura & Ashley girls and that poor Susan Powell woman (her boys were later murdered by her murderer...the husband).

But the searchs of mines have come up empty. Just makes me wonder where all these missing people/spouses go.

I've heard stories on UM of bodies dumped into mine shafts.IE...Robert Weeks's missing lovers, Laura & Ashley girls and that poor Susan Powell woman (her boys were later murdered by her murderer...the husband).


I have the Susan Powell case on some show, but it couldn't have been UM since it was long off the air by that point.

I have the Susan Powell case on some show, but it couldn't have been UM since it was long off the air by that point.

You're correct. Susan Powell went missing in December 2009, seven years after UM ceased production.

I'm sorry I should have separated her from the UM's stories.

I also want to point out a few more things:

-A lot has been made about Stephen hiring two private investigators to follow his wife right before her disappearance, and then doing nothing when she disappeared. But there are numerous points to consider:

1) Stephen actually called the police and voluntarily told them about the private investigators, without them even bringing up the subject. Would a guilty party be brazen enough to do this when he wasn't obligated to? Why cast more suspicion on himself?

2) If Stephen was so gung-ho about hiring private investigators because he thought his wife was cheating on him, how come he didn't hire any when his wife really was having an affair back in 1980? Or at any other time during their marriage? So Stephen doesn't hire PI's when his wife is having an affair, but hires them when she isn't? That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

I think Stephen may have hired them out of concern for his wife as she was having nervous breakdowns and he didn't know the cause of it. And FWIW, he said it was "off and on for 11 months" in regards to the PI's.

They were married 12 years, which isn't an insignificant amount of time. There is also no known history of abuse in the marriage.

Lastly, on the Charlie Projects website about Doreen it says that Stephan did leave a suicide note to his mother that expressed guilt about Doreen's disappearance but never specifically said what happened or a body's location. That reminds me of the accountant Dennis Gerwing on Disappeared who committed suicide and left a rambling suicide note that seemed to hint at guilt but never actually said what happened or where the Calvert's bodies were.

I always thought that he admitted his guilt in the letter? But in regards to the whole case of Stephen appearing on Unsolved Mysteries....do you think he did that thinking it would throw suspicion off of him? If he had declined to be interviewed it may have made him look even more guilty.

I always thought that he admitted his guilt in the letter? But in regards to the whole case of Stephen appearing on Unsolved Mysteries....do you think he did that thinking it would throw suspicion off of him? If he had declined to be interviewed it may have made him look even more guilty.

I don't think it really makes a difference if he was interviewed on camera or not. People have been interviewed that looked guilty as sin and there have been some segments that directly hint at a persons alleged guilt that declined to be interviewed.

I think Stephen Marfeo most definitely murdered his wife.

Marfeo came off much, much worse than other guilty spouses on UM, IMO.

Just had that arrogant vibe about him. There's no doubt in my mind that he's guilty. His lunch break is a huge red flag. He did not report her missing for two days. Another red flag.

According to Marfeo, he believed that Doreen was having an affair and ran off with another man. Without leaving a note. Without taking her tooth brush. Without taking any money from their accounts (Marfeo could have easily verified this). Without her car. Without her pets. Without a farewell note. If you suspected your wife ran off without all of these items, wouldn't you at the very least want to contact police to see if they could help aide in your efforts to find her and make sure she was ok?

If you suspected your wife ran off without all of these items, wouldn't you at the very least want to contact police to see if they could help aide in your efforts to find her and make sure she was ok?

not necessarily, no. some marriages suck. divorce isn't an option for financial or other reasons, and most reasonable people wouldn't consider sinister alternatives. Some folks would consider this akin to winning the lottery.

not necessarily, no. some marriages suck. divorce isn't an option for financial or other reasons, and most reasonable people wouldn't consider sinister alternatives. Some folks would consider this akin to winning the lottery.

Yes, but according to Marfeo they were working on fixing their marriage at that point. Add on the fact that he seemed obsessed with having people follow Doreen around (hiring PI's), I find it extremely odd (and also incriminating) that he not contact the police for two full days. The guy was obviously a jealous psychopath, so if he indeed was innocent in Doreen's disappearance, I'd see him leaving no stone unturned to try and find her and whatever guy she was allegedly with.

He premeditated the first degree murder of his ex girlfriend and attempted murder of her current boyfriend. This same person's wife whom he was quite possessive and jealous of mysteriously disappeared years earlier and to this day she has never been heard from? Oh and in his suicide letter he states he feels guilty about his wife's disappearance? Yeaaa, the glove fits. Case Closed

Guilty as hell.

I have almost no doubt that she was screwing at least one other guy on the side-- he was probably right about that detail. But it's not worthy of killing someone, obviously.

I just read that in his suicide note he wrote, "I've been alive nine years too long." You can say, "aaaawww, you feel sorry for the psycho. Get real-- he killed two women." But you know... yeah, it was a sad sentence.

Guilty as sin, absolutely no doubt about it...

No.

:lol:

so if he indeed was innocent in Doreen's disappearance, I'd see him leaving no stone unturned to try and find her and whatever guy she was allegedly with.

In that case, wouldn't he have wanted to murder the guy Doreen was having an affair with as well, especially since he DID try to murder his ex-girlfriends new love interest?

I suppose the reason why I am not convinced he is guilty is that he never once mentioned it in the suicide note. What's the harm in coming clean if you are planning to end it all anyway?

In that case, wouldn't he have wanted to murder the guy Doreen was having an affair with as well, especially since he DID try to murder his ex-girlfriends new love interest?

I suppose the reason why I am not convinced he is guilty is that he never once mentioned it in the suicide note. What's the harm in coming clean if you are planning to end it all anyway?

I've seen this claim that she was having an affair, but I have yet to see any source for it. UM and Charley Project, as well as the PI Stephen hired, found no evidence that she was being unfaithful to Stephen. Her sister said she confided in her, ten years prior to her disappearance, about an affair and was contemplating leaving Stephen, but she ultimately decided against it. Stephen probably did not know about that one.

How many no’s do you want?

I suppose the reason why I am not convinced he is guilty is that he never once mentioned it in the suicide note. What's the harm in coming clean if you are planning to end it all anyway?

On the Unsolved wiki page,

http://unsolvedmysteries.wikia.com/wiki/Doreen_Marfeo

it mentions that he wrote in the suicide note that he "felt guilty" for her death.
Why wouldn't he do a full confession? Yeah, the thought crossed my mind as well. There are two things at play, in my opinion.

A lesser thing: the sister and mother defended him. I rarely play the "I majored in psychology" card-- but I will now. I don't believe that he was a psychopath, so he probably felt guilt for their support and couldn't bring himself to embarrass them in death.

Probably the the larger issue: You might have noticed that he seemed rather standoffish and downright angry when he discussed the police investigation. They probably harassed him until the day he offed himself. He didn't want them to have a win in the end.

Totally agree with the above post. No way, even in death, that Marfeo would give anyone the satisfaction of a confession - especially the detective who was openly stalking him. Nor, even in death, do I think he would dash his in-laws' belief in his innocence.