Sorry if this thread has been made before, but this is the UM unpopular opinions thread. If you have a different opinion than most on certain cases then post it here. I'll start.

1.) Amy Lynn Bradley - I don't think she was sold into sexual slavery, but fell overboard.

2.) Kurt Mcfall - I think he was murdered and placed under the cliff to make it seem like an accident.

3.) Angela Hammond - I don't believe she was kidnapped by an unknown man, but rather someone she knew.

Not my personal opinions, but I've seen some people try to argue that

Don Kemp was murdered

Wanda Jean Mays was murdered

- The lucky rock had no magical powers

- The fertility statues have no power to get women pregnant

- The aphrodisiac chocolate is just chocolate

- T-touch is not real

- [Insert miracle vision here] is not real

My unpopular opinion would be that Tim McClure did not have anything to do with his mother's murder.

- The lucky rock had no magical powers

- The fertility statues have no power to get women pregnant

- The aphrodisiac chocolate is just chocolate

- T-touch is not real

- [Insert miracle vision here] is not real

I always appreciate your insights Todd, popularity notwithstanding, lol. Ditto, BTW, ditto...

One of my unpopular UM opinions regards the Amy Bechtel case. I don't believe her former husband had anything to do with her disappearance. Never did.

I think Aileen Conway was just killed in an accident. I think she stepped out & forgot about the pool (if I remember correctly, the water was left running)

Russell Evans was a hit & run victim

Omar the arsonist's voice never scared me, even when I was little. Always thought he sounded like a kid, and an extremely dorky one at that, who was probably bullied mercilessly in school.

"Ancient spirits of evil?" Yeah. He stole that line from 'Thundercats,' which was the IT cartoon at that time.

1) Son of Sam didn't act alone. I think there's reason to believe he had accomplices.

2) I think it's highly possible Wayne Hecker was not guilty and that Tara Breckenridge was kidnapped/picked up by a stalker when she pulled over on the highway due to her broken fan belt. Because she didn't take her mace, I think she tried to make it to a call box. I don't think Wayne had enough time to commit the crime.

3) Lauren Jackson's mother had nothing to do with her disappearance.

4) I think Bobby Parker really was afraid something would happen to her family if she left Randolph Dial, and did not run away willingly. She may have chosen to stay eventually, but I think she was abducted.

I feel this will be unpopular, but I found Randy Parker one of the most sympathetic people ever interviewed on UM. The love and devotion this man has for his wife is touching to me, while I know others find him deluded. In any case, I'm glad they're together again.

5) I lean toward Dan Tondevold faking his death, and think there's way more to this case we don't know.

Omar the arsonist's voice never scared me, even when I was little. Always thought he sounded like a kid, and an extremely dorky one at that, who was probably bullied mercilessly in school.

"Ancient spirits of evil?" Yeah. He stole that line from 'Thundercats,' which was the IT cartoon at that time.

Man, I LOVED the Thundercats!

2) I think it's highly possible Wayne Hecker was not guilty and that Tara Breckenridge was kidnapped/picked up by a stalker when she pulled over on the highway due to her broken fan belt. Because she didn't take her mace, I think she tried to make it to a call box. I don't think Wayne had enough time to commit the crime.

Totally agree. There's just no way he did it. I've posted on this case in great length on here before though so I won't get too detailed here. While he most likely wasn't the best boyfriend in the world and didn't come off the least bit likable in his UM interview, I am 100% convinced he had nothing to do with Tara's disappearance and death.

My unpopular opinion; The opening theme music for seasons 8-9 is better than the original opening theme music.

These aren't unpopular anymore, but for a long time I had two of them:

1. Mike Reimer was a victim, not a murderer, and never left the woods - pretty much totally vindicated.
2. Dub Wackerhagen and son were both victims, and Dub was completely innocent. The police now believe this. The motive that the cops/family try to give him in the segment always seemed incredibly weak to me.

More and more lately there's the whisper of an unpopular opinion dogging me about the Bible/Freeman case. Sometimes I worry that the girls haven't been found because there's maybe nothing to find. Is it possible that the Bible/Freeman girls just completely incinerated in that fire, leaving no trace of them? My sincere apologies if that sounds grizzly, or unintentionally insensitive, but I didn't know how else to articulate my thoughts.

My unpopular opinion; The opening theme music for seasons 8-9 is better than the original opening theme music.

I agree with this.

That Adam Emory was just some otherwise normal guy with no criminal history who "snapped" and killed Jason Bass in fit of rage coupled with poor judgement and that he subsequently took his own life rather than face prison.

The show and some people here make him out to be some diabolical, soulless, criminal mastermind.

I have many opinions that go against the norm here. Wackers were 100% innocent, Kurt Sova died accidentally, Tim McClure is innocent, Bobby Parker was a victim and leaning towards Mike Reimer being a serial killer.

Mike Reimer being a serial killer.

LOL surely this is a troll opinion.

Nope. I moderated here for over 10 years so not exactly a troll...:lol:

Maybe not, I've LOL'd at many of the theory argued here before.

My favorite are the posters who try to make every murder into a hoax. I remember someone tried to claim that Joyce McLain's death wasn't a murder, that she was killed by a falling branch or something.

I'm not so sure Don Sherman murdered his wife. I have no doubt he's an abusive POS, but I see zero reason for him to have recovered Linda's skull and left it out in public years later.

4) I think Bobby Parker really was afraid something would happen to her family if she left Randolph Dial, and did not run away willingly. She may have chosen to stay eventually, but I think she was abducted.

I feel this will be unpopular, but I found Randy Parker one of the most sympathetic people ever interviewed on UM. The love and devotion this man has for his wife is touching to me, while I know others find him deluded. In any case, I'm glad they're together again.

I totally agree with this. All it took for me to solidify that stance was television interviews with Bobbi Parker, and one reading of Randolph Dial's own account of the event, which I think was titled Into the Wind or something like that. Long story short, it's exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from a habitual liar. He posits the narrative that Bobbi Parker held a fascination for him although was not a completely willing party in his escape. There are accounts of carving a handgun out of soap (yes), and of his heroically and quite cinematically saving Bobbi from being raped by a group of men at one point. I recall exclaiming "Bullsh*t!" on more than one occasion while reading it.

Randy Parker is the salt of the earth.


My submissions for this thread are that I lean toward Tommy Burkett killing himself, and that Larry Race shouldn't have been convicted on the evidence presented at his initial trial.

Also, I totally repped the Mike Riemer and Dub Wackerhagen not killing their significant others theories before they were cool. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think the Wackers themselves were innocent but I also think that they were being attacked by family and/or close friends that they didn't want to finger so they kept up the idea of some total stranger doing the misdeeds so they wouldn't rock the boat re 'family harmony'.

On some military stories:

-Mike Carmichael and Billy Ray Hargrove both committed suicide.

-I'm not sure how necessarily unpopular this is, but I don't think Chad Langford was doing any undercover work, that he was willingly in on the "PX funds" thwarted robbery scheme, and that his death may have been perpetrated by others who were also involved in the same.

-Ralph Sigler really was killed by Soviet operatives

My unpopular opinion; The opening theme music for seasons 8-9 is better than the original opening theme music.

I am a fan of the original music too.

LOL surely this is a troll opinion.

Nope. I agree with her.

I also agree that Kurt Sova died accidentally.

Paul Polis did not kill his wife and Charlotte's mother was unhinged.

Paul Polis did not kill his wife and Charlotte's mother was unhinged.


All of Charlottes family was off their rockers IMO. I also think he didn't kill her

I totally agree with this. All it took for me to solidify that stance was television interviews with Bobbi Parker, and one reading of Randolph Dial's own account of the event, which I think was titled Into the Wind or something like that. Long story short, it's exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from a habitual liar. He posits the narrative that Bobbi Parker held a fascination for him although was not a completely willing party in his escape. There are accounts of carving a handgun out of soap (yes), and of his heroically and quite cinematically saving Bobbi from being raped by a group of men at one point. I recall exclaiming "Bullsh*t!" on more than one occasion while reading it.

Randy Parker is the salt of the earth.


My submissions for this thread are that I lean toward Tommy Burkett killing himself, and that Larry Race shouldn't have been convicted on the evidence presented at his initial trial.
Not to get off topic but randy Parkers line...I'll show you what administrative power is all about. I almost used that line at work and quickly realized I watch too much UM.

Good thread freakbook.

On some military stories:

-Mike Carmichael and Billy Ray Hargrove both committed suicide.

-I'm not sure how necessarily unpopular this is, but I don't think Chad Langford was doing any undercover work, that he was willingly in on the "PX funds" thwarted robbery scheme, and that his death may have been perpetrated by others who were also involved in the same.

-Ralph Sigler really was killed by Soviet operatives
I agree with the Carmichael and Hargrove cases both being suicide. I respect the segment because if anything the public should be made aware of the difficulties that people in the military face and how it can make them more prone to suicide even when they are not directly involved in combat operations. For me both cases scream suicide and perhaps two people that were very disappointed with their circumstances. Perhaps they wanted the army to face negative criticism from their families and the press. Just my opinion.

Good thread freakbook.

Thanks. I know this is ironic coming from me given my past attitudes/arguments, so I'm the last person who should talk, but I'd like for this not to turn into a flame thread. A safe haven where folks can give alternate theories that's in the minority without them getting jumped on.

That Jeffrey Digmin, Tony Lombardi, Norman Ladner, etc. committed suicide.

Or that defendants like Thomas Drake, Larry Race, John Branion, Stuart Heaton, etc. could actually be guilty.

It just seems that there is a tendency on here, for reasons I can only speculate, to automatically give more weight/credence to the versions of the stories told by the family, hired PI, defendant, or whoever.

Hand in hand with this is the a priori assumption that the police and/or prosecutors must be incompetent, corrupt, covering up, even in cases when there is no known evidence that this has occurred.

It some times makes it frustrating trying to debate if you believe the theory of the police or prosecutor, yet you have folks coming right out of the gate just automatically disbelieving the authorities and giving the opposing side a leg up.

The only ones of those I'd disagree with is Norman Ladner, just a bit too strange for me to believe suicide. I think in general though the 'did he commit suicide OR not?' cases on UM are too far fetched, but I always found Ladner one of the most questionable of all of them.

There are some times that the cops in the story are so incompetent that It's hard not to doubt everything they say.

The two examples I'd think of are the Albuquerque Police re: Kaitlyn Arquette and even more so the North Carolina police interviewed in the Debbie Wolfe segment, to me one of the most frustrating UM cases.

Larry Race is innocent

Larry Race is innocent

Don't know if it's unpopular anymore but o believe Cindy James was very mentally ill and there was no harasser

A few more where I am against the majority are thinking Cindy James was murdered, Al Henderson did not harm Jean Moore and that the Maples took their grandchildren to protect them from being abused.

That Jeffrey Digmin, Tony Lombardi, Norman Ladner, etc. committed suicide.

Or that defendants like Thomas Drake, Larry Race, John Branion, Stuart Heaton, etc. could actually be guilty.

It just seems that there is a tendency on here, for reasons I can only speculate, to automatically give more weight/credence to the versions of the stories told by the family, hired PI, defendant, or whoever.

Hand in hand with this is the a priori assumption that the police and/or prosecutors must be incompetent, corrupt, covering up, even in cases when there is no known evidence that this has occurred.

It some times makes it frustrating trying to debate if you believe the theory of the police or prosecutor, yet you have folks coming right out of the gate just automatically disbelieving the authorities and giving the opposing side a leg up.

I wasn't convinced by any of the military suicides that are supposed to actually be murders.

Nor that girl who's mother used a broom to measure her arm as a means to rule out her daughter firing the shotgun.

Nor that girl who's mother used a broom to measure her arm as a means to rule out her daughter firing the shotgun.

I agree. I am 100% convinced Rae Ann Mossor killed herself.

Don't know if it's unpopular anymore but o believe Cindy James was very mentally ill and there was no harasser


I believe this as well

I also think Norman Leander committed suicide. His parents mentioned he loved the woods/animals so it makes sense he ended his life in a place where he felt at peace

Rae Ann Mossor I would normally think suicide but I must admit the placement of the gun is kind of strange

Never believed the full story of the Casie Nicole. I'm not saying Billy murdered his shipmates, but his story doesn't add up nor make sense. No way he could've swam that distance. I wonder if he just chose not to go along with the others but lied so he wouldn't seem like a bad guy?

I also wonder if he chose to save himself and let the others drown?

and that the Maples took their grandchildren to protect them from being abused.

If that were the motive, why didn't they take the third child? There was another son they didn't bother with. That's what always made that theory fall apart for me.

The fact that such cases bring out such strong and polarizing opinions is probably why 1) later Unsolved Mysteries didn't have parental/familial kidnapping cases 2) almost all of them are cut from the Amazon seasons.

...

Rae Ann Mossor I would normally think suicide but I must admit the placement of the gun is kind of strange

I don't remember the specifics at present but I think a lot of these generic "inconsistencies" can be explained by an involuntary body movement or spasm brought on by the event, to say nothing of weather conditions like wind, knocking things in an unexpected manor.

I guess sometimes I have a tendency to think that Megadeth Man didn't have anything to do with Debra Poe's disappearance. Sometimes I wonder if he wasn't just some schmo who stumbled into to an empty stop and rob and decided to take advantage by helping himself to the till.

I guess sometimes I have a tendency to think that Megadeth Man didn't have anything to do with Debra Poe's disappearance. Sometimes I wonder if he wasn't just some schmo who stumbled into to an empty stop and rob and decided to take advantage by helping himself to the till.

They said that as much in the segment, they weren't dead-set on him being a kidnapper, but it's interesting that he posed as a clerk.

They said that as much in the segment, they weren't dead-set on him being a kidnapper, but it's interesting that he posed as a clerk.

Yeah, I always thought that was interesting myself, but then I try to remind myself that some people are just plain goofy, and who knows why they do what they do?

Not sure if it's unpopular or not, but I was also never convinced that Jeffrey MacDonald killed his family.

Wasn't there a theory floating around at some stage that a member of Nyleen Kay Marshall's family was responsible for her disappearance?

Rae Ann Mossor I would normally think suicide but I must admit the placement of the gun is kind of strange

I agree with this and was thinking about submitting this one as one of my unpopularly-held opinions.

I don't know if I believe Rae Ann was murdered, per se, but I don't think she committed suicide.

Not to get off topic but randy Parkers line...I'll show you what administrative power is all about. I almost used that line at work and quickly realized I watch too much UM.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I totally picked up "I'm here to tell you..." from that detective in the Tim McClure segment and have used it for YEARS now.

Not sure how unpopular this is either, but I think Tommy Zeigler is guilty.

Oliver the Monkey was just a monkey caked in make-up

I literally just skipped the monkey segment.

I literally just skipped the money segment.

I woke up and this segment was playing on the television. I woke up to a monkey holding a cigar. It was quite hilarious.

Not sure how popular / unpopular this is, but whatever show Dennis Farina filmed and is up on Amazon right now is not Unsolved Mysteries. I will never acknowledge them as so.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I totally picked up "I'm here to tell you..." from that detective in the Tim McClure segment and have used it for YEARS now.

I've ripped off that exact southern "uh-oh" from the foot locker bones segment.

Not sure how unpopular this is either, but I think Tommy Zeigler is guilty.


it seems people are changing their mind on him. I wonder why

it seems people are changing their mind on him. I wonder why

I always thought he was.

I agree with this and was thinking about submitting this one as one of my unpopularly-held opinions.

I don't know if I believe Rae Ann was murdered, per se, but I don't think she committed suicide.
I feel the same way. I think the general consensus on this board is that it was a suicide, but I have problems with that theory.

That Adam Emory was just some otherwise normal guy with no criminal history who "snapped" and killed Jason Bass in fit of rage coupled with poor judgement and that he subsequently took his own life rather than face prison.

The show and some people here make him out to be some diabolical, soulless, criminal mastermind.

I agree that Adam Emery likely killed himself. I agree that he was drunk and pissed off, when he killed Jason Bass. But the fact that even after being arrested and after sobering up, he still didn't show remorse for what he'd done, does not speak well of him at all

If that were the motive, why didn't they take the third child? There was another son they didn't bother with. That's what always made that theory fall apart for me.



Jon Bunting (formerly Bobby Baskin) has addressed that question on the board. Here is what he said:


Michael's situation was always something that felt tragic to us all. The Baskins left us with Marvin and Sandra frequently due to, as I was told, the fact that they couldn't afford to support and feed us. Originally all three of us were left, but due to things I won't go into out of respect for Michael, it became too much of a challenge to have all three of us. Keep in mind, also, that originally they only thought that Mark's parents were involved in the abuse, because I did not want to tell on my parents. I thought that maybe if I told on ONE person, the abuse would stop. With that in mind, they initially thought Michael was safe with Mark and Debbie. When they learned of the full extent of the abuse (because it continued in visitation), they only had two of us. They went and told the story to the authorities and were granted immediate temporary custody of the two they already had, and while they TRIED to get custody of Michael, it was a lot more difficult with the Baskins now on alert about the situation. When we drove off in our big grey GMC van it was because they had learned that child services was going to come and get us, literally the next day. They only had two of us, and it was either save us and leave Michael, or save none of us.

Larry Race is innocent

That's convincing.

Probably too many to list but...

* 98% of the Unexplained Death cases featuring a suspected suicide, were in fact suicides. Including the very controversial Cindy James case. A case where I think, unequivocally, a homicide occurred was Keith Warren. There are some others, of course.

* 99% of the Amnesia cases were hoaxes or mentally ill people.

* 100% of the UFO cases were hoaxes or people swept into a frenzy.

I always had trouble believing John Grundhofer's story about being "kidnapped" by the incompetent fat guy who dropped his cheat sheet.

I always thought he was.

For a very long time I felt the case was THE most convoluted, confusing story UM ever aired, so I really had no opinion either way until a few years ago when I finally got brave enough to sort it out. After I did that, I actually kind of wondered how he ever became the cause celebre he is today, because I thought the state had a pretty damn good argument for Zeigler's guilt. I surmise it probably has mostly to do with Maurice Paul and that whole controversy.

Probably too many to list but...


* 100% of the Amnesia cases were hoaxes or mentally ill people.
.

Well, on the other hand, Susan Lafuerte's case was labeled as Amnesia also. The Amnesia cases that weren't hoaxes like that, as well probably the girl from the Karl Malden episode I'd put into a 3rd category of 'severe head injury' for which memory loss is normal.

Well, on the other hand, Susan Lafuerte's case was labeled as Amnesia also. The Amnesia cases that weren't hoaxes like that, as well probably the girl from the Karl Malden episode I'd put into a 3rd category of 'severe head injury' for which memory loss is memory.

That's a fair example of a legitimate Amnesia case.

That's a fair example of a legitimate Amnesia case.

With Kyra Cook, it looked like it started with a true case of memory loss from a concussion that I think she stretched out to be more dramatic than it really was. But I do think there was legitimate memory loss.

With Lafuerte, there was no doubt. That level of head trauma is also why many severe car accident survivors have no memory of the events that lead up to the crash.

With Kyra Cook, it looked like it started with a true case of memory loss from a concussion that I think she stretched out to be more dramatic than it really was. But I do think there was legitimate memory loss.

With Lafuerte, there was no doubt. That level of head trauma is also why many severe car accident survivors have no memory of the events that lead up to the crash.

Good points. And I should also mention that there was another case of suicide that I definitely think foul play was involved... in keeping with my very broad "99%" though, I think: Bobby Fuller.

Went back and adjusted my admittedly broad percentages. :)

That's a fair example of a legitimate Amnesia case.

I took you're statement to mean the people who came on claiming not to know who they were and relying on the viewers to identify them, and for that I agree with you. I think they were either seeking notoriety or in the case of the two with criminal records were reluctant participants, their friends coming up with the idea to present it on the show and being caught in the lie not being able to argue against it. "Why wouldn't you want to go on Unsolved Mysteries and find out who you are??" Then they just hoped people were watching ABC that night.

I think there's grounds for some of the suicides to be murders, but there is also a lot of wishful thinking. There's no way Crystal Spencer was a suicide or an accident, same for the kids on the train tracks.

I took you're statement to mean the people who came on claiming not to know who they were and relying on the viewers to identify them, and for that I agree with you. I think they were either seeking notoriety or in the case of the two with criminal records were reluctant participants, their friends coming up with the idea to present it on the show and being caught in the lie not being able to argue against it. "Why wouldn't you want to go on Unsolved Mysteries and find out who you are??" Then they just hoped people were watching ABC that night.

I think there's grounds for some of the suicides to be murders, but there is also a lot of wishful thinking. There's no way Crystal Spencer was a suicide or an accident.

For sure, I think Crystal Spencer was a homicide; accidental or otherwise.

If I had to give a number to the ones I personally believe were legitimate I'd say maybe 25% I might be being generous.


Off the top of my head:
I think Bryan Nisenfeld was another sad statistic for LGBT suicides.
Kurt Sova I think was likely an accidental end to a tearaway weekend.
Train track kids = murder, and that ruling the result of some very outdated marijuana mindsets.
Keith Warren = murder
Dave Bocks = murder
Rae Ann Mossor = accident or suicide
All the various military people = suicide and none involved in secret projects, especially paper tearing guy.
Tony Lombardi ... eeeh. Could go either way for me, but it's also so easy to just not notice a light when doing the laundry.

I guess I'm posting about this particular case because I'm currently watching a documentary about it, but I guess I never really believed the Tupac and Biggie cases were connected.

1. Mike Reamer murdered his wife and then committed suicide. He and his wife's deaths are not in any way connected to the murder victims found nearby.

2. Hugh Harlin murdered his wife and then later disappeared willingly.

3. Snea Philip was murdered before 9/11

4. L'enfante was a hoax (not sure if that's unpopular)

I think Chad Noe had some involvement with the deaths of Wendy and the others.

I look at most of the fraud victims and honestly I find them all stupid. I don't want to sound mean but I can't be sympathetic.

Sharon Kinne died in Mexico lbr. Cartel probably killed her.

One of my unpopular UM opinions regards the Amy Bechtel case. I don't believe her former husband had anything to do with her disappearance. Never did.

I thought most think the husband is innocent, and Dale Wayne Eaton killed her.
I agree. I am 100% convinced Rae Ann Mossor killed herself.

I don't think she killed herself. I think in a fit of rage she slammed the gun onto the trunk of the car and it went off. I chalk it up to an accidental discharge.

I thought most think the husband is innocent, and Dale Wayne Eaton killed her.


I don't think she killed herself. I think in a fit of rage she slammed the gun onto the trunk of the car and it went off. I chalk it up to an accidental discharge.

Isn't Eaton also the man who murdered Little Miss?

Isn't Eaton also the man who murdered Little Miss?

Yep. He was int the area at the time, and his own brother puts him on that road on that day.

Police think he's a serial killer.

-Every person featured in the Final Appeal segments (aside from the ones that were actually exonerated) were guilty except Michael Scott Martin, Steve Shores and Frederick Young.
-Andre Young and Keith Warren committed suicide.
-Family members of people whose deaths were ruled suicides but believe they were murdered should not be held in a higher regard than the official version given by coroners, police departments, etc.

I don't think she killed herself. I think in a fit of rage she slammed the gun onto the trunk of the car and it went off. I chalk it up to an accidental discharge.

I agree.

I also lean towards Bryan Nisenfeld's death being an accident as opposed to him killing himself.

Probably too many to list but...

* 98% of the Unexplained Death cases featuring a suspected suicide, were in fact suicides. Including the very controversial Cindy James case. A case where I think, unequivocally, a homicide occurred was Keith Warren. There are some others, of course.

* 99% of the Amnesia cases were hoaxes or mentally ill people.

* 100% of the UFO cases were hoaxes or people swept into a frenzy.



100% of UFO cases can't be hoaxes since many of them had whole towns as witnesses. They may not have seen an alien spacecraft, but I think they definitely saw something

-Every person featured in the Final Appeal segments (aside from the ones that were actually exonerated) were guilty except Michael Scott Martin, Steve Shores and Frederick Young.
-Andre Young and Keith Warren committed suicide.
-Family members of people who's deaths were ruled suicides but believe they were murdered should not be held in a higher regard than the official version given by coroners, police departments, etc.




wow, from what I remember it was overwhelmingly believed that Keith Warren died accidentally and the suicide was staged. What made you decide to go against that theory?

wow, from what I remember it was overwhelmingly believed that Keith Warren died accidentally and the suicide was staged. What made you decide to go against that theory?

Just more information left out of the broadcast of the UM segment. It's discussed in the main Keith Warren thread.

100% of UFO/Miracles/Unexplained are hoaxes
Megadeth Man never existed
Dale Kerstetter wasnt involved
Tara Calico/Michael Henley photo is a hoax

100% of UFO/Miracles/Unexplained are hoaxes
Megadeth Man never existed
Dale Kerstetter wasnt involved
Tara Calico/Michael Henley photo is a hoax

Boo, Oscar and Ringo stories are true :)

100% of UFO/Miracles/Unexplained are hoaxes
Megadeth Man never existed
Dale Kerstetter wasnt involved
Tara Calico/Michael Henley photo is a hoax

100% agree with you about Kerstetter. I have always believed that he was a murder victim and his body was wheeled out in the duffel bag by the masked intruder.

As far as your Megadeth Man theory goes, I hadn't actually heard that one before. Anything is possible though!

--I believe Larry Race was innocent.
--I believe Tony Lombardi and Tommy Burkett were murdered.
--I believe Dexter Stefonik was killed by someone who lived in Glendive, MT and the good ol' boy network is protecting the killer.

....and it hasn't been featured on UM, BUT....
-- I believe Maura Murray died of hypothermia in the woods on the night she disappeared.

--I believe Larry Race was innocent.
--I believe Tony Lombardi and Tommy Burkett were murdered.
--I believe Dexter Stefonik was killed by someone who lived in Glendive, MT and the good ol' boy network is protecting the killer.

....and it hasn't been featured on UM, BUT....
-- I believe Maura Murray died of hypothermia in the woods on the night she disappeared.

Funny you mention that about the Murray case Ricci. I used to believe that she met with foul play, but the more I learn about the case, the more I believe it was something else entirely.

....and it hasn't been featured on UM, BUT....
-- I believe Maura Murray died of hypothermia in the woods on the night she disappeared.

Yep.

Another possibly unpopular opinion I have regards the Dick Hansen murder. I never put much stock in the license plate theory. I've always believed that "Jean" knew more about the crime than she told LE. JMO of course.

Another possibly unpopular opinion I have regards the Dick Hansen murder. I never put much stock in the license plate theory. I've always believed that "Jean" knew more about the crime than she told LE. JMO of course.
I've never been convinced by the license plate theory. If Jean's story is accurate, the killer may have been pointing at Jean herself, and that's why Dick flipped out. He may have said something sexual, for example.

That's an interesting theory that Jean could know more. I think that's more likely than the license plate theory.

-Family members of people who's deaths were ruled suicides but believe they were murdered should not be held in a higher regard than the official version given by coroners, police departments, etc.

^^^
THIS

That is what I was getting at, but I think the point got lost when folks became fixated on the specific cases I mentioned.

Seriously, why do we give the leg up to family/defendant-based theories and assume the police were wrong?

^^^
THIS

That is what I was getting at, but I think the point got lost when folks became fixated on the specific cases I mentioned.

Seriously, why do we give the leg up to family/defendant-based theories and assume the police were wrong?

I agree with both of you, however for me, it depends on the case. Like Amy Lynn Bradley's parents. They tried so hard to get her case looked at as an sexual slavery angle to the point where they lost valuable time and money. No one has ever seem to have doubted her parents and just went with their theory without questioning it.

But to answer the initial question, it's sympathy. When you look at Amy Lynn Bradley's parents investigating, and appearing on every show then people are going to get sympathetic and side with them, and blame the police for not caring/trying hard. People want the family to get justice, so they start "rooting" for them so to speak, especially if the police aren't seeming helpful.

James Harrod was not the trigger man in the Tovrea hit. No chance in hell he was capable of traversing the terrain to make it into the house. Police fabricated evidence against him. Wether that evidence was fabricated to get him to flip to catch a bigger fish or to protect the actual shooter, I do not know yet. I would have to move to Arizona and immerse myself in the case full time to accomplish that.

I agree with both of you, however for me, it depends on the case. Like Amy Lynn Bradley's parents. They tried so hard to get her case looked at as an sexual slavery angle to the point where they lost valuable time and money. No one has ever seem to have doubted her parents and just went with their theory without questioning it.

But to answer the initial question, it's sympathy. When you look at Amy Lynn Bradley's parents investigating, and appearing on every show then people are going to get sympathetic and side with them, and blame the police for not caring/trying hard. People want the family to get justice, so they start "rooting" for them so to speak, especially if the police aren't seeming helpful.

That's my main issue though. Family members will go on TV and claim the police were rude to them, lied about specifics, didn't investigate so and so properly, etc. and people automatically believe it. It's weird. I used to side with the families for reasons you listed until I saw/read about the Morgan Ingram case. Her mother made several claims about a stalker, and actually had surveillance footage that showed someone standing near/in their driveway before Morgan was found dead shortly after. Her parents even went on Dr. Phil and accused a friend of Morgan's of murder, and that her parents helped with a cover up. It was all ridiculous, and it was pointed out on the Dr. Phil show that near the driveway of the house where Morgan lived was a pathway in some woods that people would use to walk through the neighborhood. All in all, the mother's claims all lacked any credibility. I don't get why we are so quick to question the official version based off of some very biased anecdotes and stories from family members. That's not to say that the official version is always right. It's just that more credence shouldn't be given to the version pushed by the relatives of a deceased person who died of a suspicious death.

That's my main issue though. Family members will go on TV and claim the police were rude to them, lied about specifics, didn't investigate so and so properly, etc. and people automatically believe it. It's weird. I used to side with the families for reasons you listed until I saw/read about the Morgan Ingram case. Her mother made several claims about a stalker, and actually had surveillance footage that showed someone standing near/in their driveway before Morgan was found dead shortly after. Her parents even went on Dr. Phil and accused a friend of Morgan's of murder, and that her parents helped with a cover up. It was all ridiculous, and it was pointed out on the Dr. Phil show that near the driveway of the house where Morgan lived was a pathway in some woods that people would use to walk through the neighborhood. All in all, the mother's claims all lacked any credibility. I don't get why we are so quick to question the official version based off of some very biased anecdotes and stories from family members. That's not to say that the official version is always right. It's just that more credence shouldn't be given to the version pushed by the relatives of a deceased person who died of a suspicious death.

You know, when I used to watch the show when I was younger, and before the Internet was around, I pretty much ate up whatever theory the show was proposing at the time. It wasn't until I matured and I also started digging deeper into some of the cases (sparked by curiosity) and reading about them in books, newspaper articles, appellate briefs, and so on that I realized how much the show heavily skewed things toward whatever specific conclusion they wanted the viewer to arrive at.

I always considered myself a casual viewer/fan of UM and got in to it more as time went on. However, I can't help but feel that a lot of folks probably just don't think about the segments they watched when the show is over and the TV is off. Couple this with poor and/or underdeveloped critical reasoning skills, personal biases, and lack of outside research and it is understandable why some folks arrive at the conclusions they do.

To be clear, I don't mean any of the above as a knock at all. Just being realistic. I highly doubt the casual viewer goes to the lengths some of us do on here to find out about these cases and spends lots of time thinking about them. Not that this is right or wrong or good or bad, just the way it is.

You know, when I used to watch the show when I was younger, and before the Internet was around, I pretty much ate up whatever theory the show was proposing at the time. It wasn't until I matured and I also started digging deeper into some of the cases (sparked by curiosity) and reading about them in books, newspaper articles, appellate briefs, and so on that I realized how much the show heavily skewed things toward whatever specific conclusion they wanted the viewer to arrive at.

I always considered myself a casual viewer/fan of UM and got in to it more as time went on. However, I can't help but feel that a lot of folks probably just don't think about the segments they watched when the show is over and the TV is off. Couple this with poor and/or underdeveloped critical reasoning skills, personal biases, and lack of outside research and it is understandable why some folks arrive at the conclusions they do.

To be clear, I don't mean any of the above as a knock at all. Just being realistic. I highly doubt the casual viewer goes to the lengths some of us do on here to find out about these cases and spends lots of time thinking about them. Not that this is right or wrong or good or bad, just the way it is.

Agreed.

Another example for me would be the Keith Warren case. As far as I can tell, everyone on here, including me, believed he was either murdered or died accidentally and some of his friends freaked out and made it look like a suicide. Suicide was never an option. Until I saw more information related to the case I realized that suicide was a possibility, and the UM segment presented a decent case for murder by some shady people that could've been involved with drugs (Mark Finley was one of them). Then years later I saw a local news station report on the case that was filmed prior to the UM segment where it was alleged that Keith was lynched and it was a racially motivated hate crime. The UM segment makes no mention of this, and specifically says that a car full of black teens/men were looking for him shortly before he died. This was known back when Keith was found dead. Why the sudden change of a motive in the span of 3-4 years?

You know, when I used to watch the show when I was younger, and before the Internet was around, I pretty much ate up whatever theory the show was proposing at the time. It wasn't until I matured and I also started digging deeper into some of the cases (sparked by curiosity) and reading about them in books, newspaper articles, appellate briefs, and so on that I realized how much the show heavily skewed things toward whatever specific conclusion they wanted the viewer to arrive at.

I always considered myself a casual viewer/fan of UM and got in to it more as time went on. However, I can't help but feel that a lot of folks probably just don't think about the segments they watched when the show is over and the TV is off. Couple this with poor and/or underdeveloped critical reasoning skills, personal biases, and lack of outside research and it is understandable why some folks arrive at the conclusions they do.

To be clear, I don't mean any of the above as a knock at all. Just being realistic. I highly doubt the casual viewer goes to the lengths some of us do on here to find out about these cases and spends lots of time thinking about them. Not that this is right or wrong or good or bad, just the way it is.

I completely get what you are saying.

UM debuted when I was 11 (1987) and I began watching shortly after. It was a constant in my life in my teens and I watched reruns on Lifetime, naturally.

The person I was at 12 or 13 watching this and the person I am at 41 is obviously night and day. My interest in cases that wouldn't generally be classified as "true crime" plummeted in the ensuing years. I can enjoy the non "true crime" elements of UM as an entertaining diversion from the real world but that's ALL it is.

Also, I think there is something to be said for where we are as a society in 2017 when juxtaposed with 1987. The access to knowledge, science and truth has only gone up since then and, luckily, the interest in those areas has also flourished. The world of 30 years ago was still a world of 3 (or 4) major networks and some cable. While it could be argued that technology and access to knowledge has made us dumber, because many people choose to let their minds atrophy; the converse could just as easily be argued.

Sorry for rambling.

:wave:

I don't believe that Tammy Lynn Leppert was anywhere near as happy with her career or home life as her mother made it out to be. Nor were some of Tammy's modeling photos appropriate for a teenage girl. The photo of her in the black and white zebra print bathing suit is a perfect example.

I've always believed Larry Race, Mark Nichols and Tim McClure were innocent. In Nichols' case, his wife clearly had mental issues and wanted out of her life. Maybe it's because I am close to my own mother that I sympathize with McClure.
I also happen to think Jeffrey MacDonald is innocent. The segment outright states that investigators took his comments on the Dick Cavett Show personally and thereafter pursued him with a vengeance. At the very least, there was always enough room for doubt.
I also think Ed Baker actually died in that car explosion outside Houston.

I've always believed Larry Race, Mark Nichols and Tim McClure were innocent. In Nichols' case, his wife clearly had mental issues and wanted out of her life. Maybe it's because I am close to my own mother that I sympathize with McClure.
I also happen to think Jeffrey MacDonald is innocent. The segment outright states that investigators took his comments on the Dick Cavett Show personally and thereafter pursued him with a vengeance. At the very least, there was always enough room for doubt.
I also think Ed Baker actually died in that car explosion outside Houston.




The forensic evidence proves that MacDonald did it though

Okay my fellow UM fans, don't hate me, but here goes... I don't believe that Ted Binion was murdered. I think it's more likely that his chronic and long term drug abuse finally caught up with him. JMO of course.

Now that being said, I also feel that Murphy and Tabish took advantage of Binion's untimely death in shady and despicable ways, and was glad to see them both held accountable for it.

That Tony Ballesteros was guilty.

That Tony Ballesteros was guilty.
Now that's an interesting opinion I've never heard thrown out there before. Care to elaborate? :)

I don't think it's unpopular but the boy sitting outside of Chaim Weis' school was just a random kid & I don't think he had anything to do with the murder

I don't think it's unpopular but the boy sitting outside of Chaim Weis' school was just a random kid & I don't think he had anything to do with the murder

I've never understood why UM even bothered mentioning this. As you said he was just a random kid (sitting nearby next to water I think) who happened to be from the same school, I think it's 99% obvious he had nothing to do with / had any info on what happened.

I've never understood why UM even bothered mentioning this. As you said he was just a random kid (sitting nearby next to water I think) who happened to be from the same school, I think it's 99% obvious he had nothing to do with / had any info on what happened.

The same reason why they trumped up the satanic angle in a lot of cases, "suspense and mystery". They overblow certain parts in alot of segments to seem creepy or eerie.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I totally picked up "I'm here to tell you..." from that detective in the Tim McClure segment and have used it for YEARS now.
HaHa. So I'm not alone in the world. Gotta use that UM experience and apply it to the real world.


I have two. All of the suspects featured in the patsy wright segment are innocent and the Marfa lights like the Phx lights were a hoax. Torches are to blame.

That Tony Ballesteros was guilty.

Your wisdom amazes me...

I think Chaim Weiss killer came from the outside of the dorm. Doesn't mean he didn't know his killer I just think it was not someone staying at the dorm.

I think Chaim Weiss killer came from the outside of the dorm. Doesn't mean he didn't know his killer I just think it was not someone staying at the dorm.

I've been kind of leaning towards that side lately. But I wonder who/why? I would say it could've been a hired hit job from a jealous student, but the killer seemed young/amateurish with the moving of his body in multiple places.

I don't know how unpopular this opinion is, but I am not 100% convinced that Tim McClure killed his mom.

On paper, it looks like one of the most obvious "Yeah he did it" stories on the show.

Seeing him in the interviews though, I think he is such a dumbass that I wouldn't be surprised that he is just that dumb and is just really good at making himself look really bad.

Don't get me wrong. If one day it turns out he did do it, I wouldn't be shocked. I'm just not all the way bought into him as the culprit.

I don't know if it's unpopular, but I've always felt that Charlie Sigmin had more a temper than UM told us and that there may have been a legitimate reason why he was "unlucky in love".

Season 7 was by far the worst season of Unsolved Mysteries. Far too much paranormal stuff.

Season 7 was by far the worst season of Unsolved Mysteries. Far too much paranormal stuff.

Welcome to the board, Robert Stack's Voice! Nice to have you here.

If you didn't like the fluff in Season 7, then you'll love Season 8... :lol:

Welcome to the board, Robert Stack's Voice! Nice to have you here.

If you didn't like the fluff in Season 7, then you'll love Season 8... :lol:

I found season 8 to have less fluff. My big issue was with the paranormal and UFO segments, which I'm not excited about at all. I can go either way on Lost Loves.

Also, I have literally lurked here for the last decade on and off. I thought I'd finally jump in.

I've been kind of leaning towards that side lately. But I wonder who/why? I would say it could've been a hired hit job from a jealous student, but the killer seemed young/amateurish with the moving of his body in multiple places.

If your and Brian's opinions are unpopular, than I'll be unpopular with you all freakbook. I've always leaned towards the theory that the Weiss murder was a pure crime of opportunity by some random wacko. I think it's possible that the killer may have initially had a sex crime in mind and things took a murderous turn.

In fact I think the perpetrator may have tried a couple dorms looking to catch a victim alone, and he or she eventually came to Weiss' room. The UM segment mentions a fellow student who woke up to someone trying to gain access to his room, but he ignored it and went back to sleep. I think if that particular student had the misfortune of occupying a single dorm like Weiss did, he may have ended up being the victim instead. JMO as always.

I tend to generally lean towards the idea that the simplest answer is the best answer, especially in regards to crime. How often have we seen a case on UM where there is an elaborate theory as to the person's whereabouts only to later find out that they were simply murdered, often close in time to their disappearance? Kari Lynn Nixon comes to mind, for me.

I tend to generally lean towards the idea that the simplest answer is the best answer, especially in regards to crime. How often have we seen a case on UM where there is an elaborate theory as to the person's whereabouts only to later find out that they were simply murdered, often close in time to their disappearance? Kari Lynn Nixon comes to mind, for me.

You make a good point here. I think the Holly Krewson case is another prime example of this. The UM segment tried to float the theory that Krewson was incapacitated somewhere, trying unsuccessfully to contact her mother, when the tragic reality is her remains were eventually found, and she's now considered a homicide victim by LE.

I tend to generally lean towards the idea that the simplest answer is the best answer, especially in regards to crime. How often have we seen a case on UM where there is an elaborate theory as to the person's whereabouts only to later find out that they were simply murdered, often close in time to their disappearance? Kari Lynn Nixon comes to mind, for me.

Sammy Wheeler is another one

Speaking of Sammy Wheeler, here is something that I'm sure will be an unpopular opinion (sorry folks)...

That you are tired of jokes and quotes derived from this case and no longer find them funny because they have been repeated ad nauseam on the board.

I'll also throw this out there as another "simplest answer is best fit" unpopular opinion:

Brad Bishop very likely died in the woods after he ditched his car in the Smoky Mountains. I realize that there have been sightings, as unlikely as they may be, and that Bishop had connections all over the world but I can't help but feel like a guy who kills his family, drives hours to bury them, and then drives across a rather large state to ditch his car may not be of the most sound mind. I imagine the killings being a psychotic break and that Bishop was likely in a haze of sorts from the time he killed his family until the time that he ditched his car. Even if you buy that Bishop wanted to kill his family because they stood in the way of his career advancement, you have to admit that he certainly didn't achieve that end. He also didn't even try to cover it up in a way that made himself look not guilty so he could plausibly retain his career. What was Bishop's end game? Kill his family and travel around Europe as a wanted fugitive? It doesn't make sense. As much social stigma as he would have faced, he would've been better off just getting a divorce. I think that not getting the promotion triggered something within Bishop that led him on his spree and his own eventual death.

He very likely wandered off into the woods, got lost on a remote mountain trail, and died of exposure or starvation. His remains are likely never to be found because they were eaten by forest animals, though I suppose a bone fragment or two might be waiting somewhere.

Dave Bocks was killed because of someone else's screw up at work. No whistleblowing, or government conspiracies.

Speaking of Sammy Wheeler, here is something that I'm sure will be an unpopular opinion (sorry folks)...

That you are tired of jokes and quotes derived from this case and no longer find them funny because they have been repeated ad nauseam on the board.

You better BEANlieve it agagagagagagagahahaaga urgh ugh

I don't know if it's unpopular, but I've always felt that Charlie Sigmin had more a temper than UM told us and that there may have been a legitimate reason why he was "unlucky in love".

This; I think Mitchum and Goff planned on killing him, but that there was more of a backstory than just his concerns over her behavior.

Someone negligently fired the gun at Rae Ann Mossor; the physical evidence doesn't support a suicide or a self induced accidental injury.

Despite the mention of a "Hank" in her journal, Henry Blair had been stalking several people and never provided credible information about Amy Billig or was connected to her disappearance.

I don't blame investigators for looking at Anthonette Cayedito's parents, but similar to Lauren Jackson's disappearance, this could have been a case of an acquaintance taking advantage of a negligent parental situation.

Welcome to the board, Robert Stack's Voice! Nice to have you here.

If you didn't like the fluff in Season 7, then you'll love Season 8... :lol:

Nothing tops Season 9.

Fat guy eats a ton of free chocolate, has sex with girlfriend.

-Every person featured in the Final Appeal segments (aside from the ones that were actually exonerated) were guilty except Michael Scott Martin, Steve Shores and Frederick Young.

Let's see how I stack up...

Guilty without question

Glen Consagra
Dr. John Branion
Larry Race
Dr. Jeffery MacDonald
Paul W. Ferrell
Dan Montecalvo
Thomas Drake
Michael Lloyd Self
Stuart Heaton
Darlie Routier

Guilty with some question

Tommy Ziegler
Frederick Young

Innocent with some question

Michael Scott Martin
Port Chicago Seamen
Steve Shore
Rick McCue
Paul Freshour

Innocent without question

Johnny Lee Wilson
Patricia Stallings
Tony Miller
Luis Diaz
Rolando Cruz
John Purvis

Let's see how I stack up...

Guilty without question

Glen Consagra
Dr. John Branion
Larry Race
Dr. Jeffery MacDonald
Paul W. Ferrell
Dan Montecalvo
Thomas Drake
Michael Lloyd Self
Stuart Heaton
Darlie Routier

Guilty with some question

Tommy Ziegler
Frederick Young

Innocent with some question

Michael Scott Martin
Port Chicago Seamen
Steve Shore
Rick McCue
Paul Freshour

Innocent without question

Johnny Lee Wilson
Patricia Stallings
Tony Miller
Luis Diaz
Rolando Cruz
John Purvis

Oo I want to play!


Guilty without question

Tommy Ziegler
Glen Consagra
Jeff MacDonald
Dan Montecalvo
Thomas Drake
Stuart Heaton
Darlie Routier

Guilty with some question

Paul Ferrell
Frederick Young

Innocent with some question

Michael Lloyd Self
Larry Race
Steve Shore
Rick McCue
Michael Scott Martin
Dr. John Branion (this one was tough for me. I feel like I'm somewhere between guilty with some question and innocent with some question, simply because the timeline doesn't support Branion himself committing the murder nor was there any apparent evidence of Branion hiring anyone to commit the murder, although I'd bet dollars to donuts Branion's own, yet unrecovered PPK was in fact the murder weapon)

Innocent without question

Johnny Lee Wilson
Patricia Stallings
Tony Miller
Luis Diaz
Rolando Cruz
John Purvis
Paul Freshour
Port Chicago Seamen

You better BEANlieve it agagagagagagagahahaaga urgh ugh

221847

221847

:lol: :lol:

I had just woken up. Forgive me.

The more variables you put into play, therefore the more decisions you are forced to make, and consequently the likelihood of finding the correct solution plummets accordingly.

That Tommy Zeigler thread that has been planted near the top of page one recently is a prime example. It’s basically a blueprint of everything not to do. I legitimately feel sorry for anyone who doesn’t laugh all the way through that thread, or at least after kadrmas stopped contributing. He was always a bit more specifics-oriented than my taste but overall he had a fantastic big picture grasp, one that is very rare overall and nearly non existent on true crime message boards, where the latest 279 variable scramble is all the rage.

There is one poster, in fact, who argues one way for a half dozen years or more (innocence) in that Zeigler thread before jump shifting to loud emphasis in the other direction. A variable is suddenly inserted, one that was totally absent and apparently meant nothing 45 years after the crime but upon 47 years it screams guilt: Parties were able to keep a secret. If innocent, someone would have blabbed.

I don’t mean to criticize that person, who contributes a lot of energy to this forum. But the Zeigler switchover is a common frail tendency given the tortured point by point emphasis. It’s like being stuck in a maze. You’ve made so many decisions that each seemed sensible at the time but after failing to emerge the desperation level soars and suddenly you are frantically rejecting every choice you’ve made previously.

During that Zeigler thread you actually have other posters applauding the approach and the analysis, wanting more of it. That’s the scary aspect. I can’t describe how scary it is. Project to jury deliberation or even earlier, to prosecutors brainstorming how to decipher and present the case. When PPS (Point to Point Simpleton) mode is undertaken, no range of insulting absurdity is out of bounds. PPS is how Leah Askey understands she can invent any story and have it swallowed whole, even if none of her variables make sense as standalone, let alone together. PPS is the reason so many jurors after the fact give asinine rationalizations toward their verdict. They managed to embrace something that meant nothing.

When someone weak is victimized, and someone stronger survives, but we’d really prefer for them to be dead as well, to satisfy a variable, that’s when PPS is unleashed at its most creative and dangerous. Countless sad and tragic cases share that commonality.

If I invent as victim of a bizarre crime tonight in my neighborhood, with several dead relatives alongside, and a huge chunk of my story involves a band of distinct perpetrators, there will be no evidence of those perpetrators. It doesn’t matter if I describe four hippies or Three Blind Mice. Nobody will find them or sniff them. Nobody will subsequently volunteer as one of the Blind Mice and be taken seriously. It’s going to be air and blank stares, with suspicion properly directed at me.

The fact that Helena Stoeckley existed is devastating evidence of Jeffrey MacDonald’s innocence. That variable alone overwhelms all the PPS flails, with the laughable concept of crime scene reconstruction, that you can somehow decipher exactly how many were there, who they there, what they did, and it what sequence. Laughable doesn’t do justice to how preposterous that is. Innocent people suffer and will continue to suffer due to societal ignorance of the matter. Cases of that type inspire even loyal family members to become vindictive simpletons.

It really doesn’t matter if Stoeckley was later pressured or intimidated or threatened. It matters in justice system terms but not evaluation of the truth. None of those Stoeckley tapes or versions or details would exist upon MacDonald’s utter invention. Jeffrey Toobin understands as much. That’s why he matter of factly stated several years ago that MacDonald’s story is so unusual it’s probably true. Jeffrey Toobin is several sigmas above standard analytical thought. He’s not floundering at ground level or below like the PPS crew.

I love the cases that are so simple upon astute big picture scope but the masses waste hours and accumulated months sprawling after the trivial residue. Richard Floyd McCoy is obviously one of my favorites because only three variables matter:

1. He subsequently committed an almost identical skyjacking
2. A skyjacking of that type is so complicated and bold that almost nobody else could pull it off
3. McCoy was known to make an extremely strange and unprecedented drive from Provo to Las Vegas in the hours immediately preceding the DB Cooper event

And that’s all you need. Like the MacDonald case, a handful of variables more than trump everything else combined. But since law enforcement is dependably clueless and uneducated in terms of properly weighting the attached components, an overmatched FBI dullard like Ralph Himmelsbach is placed in charge and throws away years while chasing wind velocity and other commoner crap.

Ralph Himmelsbach probably thinks Adam Emery is alive.

During my Las Vegas decades my favorite time of year was college basketball season. That meant variables and outcomes every day for months. Great profit potential if your method is sound. On Saturdays there would be more than 100 games. My approach to handicapping college basketball could not be more simple. I use preseason ratings of every team first to last and combine with a letter grade of either R, B, C or Z for every team, also based on preseason ratings. And that’s it. No adjustment as the season progresses. I don’t care about momentum or injuries or anything else. I carry around my paperwork and bet the games accordingly all season through the NCAA tournament. It drives the specialized handicappers nuts because my win percentage almost always exceeds theirs even though they devote hours per day to exhaustive study. They can name every player on every team while I might be able to name a handful of players in the entire country.

They know more than I do about the details. But details don’t matter. Details are the foolers. Details require subjective thought, and the associated vulnerability. I’ve tried to explain that to them for decades. Finally several of them reluctantly came around, and asked for copies of my paperwork. I gave it willingly.

In sports betting you have regular results. Methods are tested accordingly, as results surface. I’m talking about real results, not Johnny-Fooled-A-Simpleton court room results.

Anyone who believes Jeffrey MacDonald is guilty is a first magnitude simpleton. I don’t have any problem assigning those words because the opposite side routinely peddles terms like stupid or gullible toward those of us aligning with innocence.

It’s always priceless when the PPS troops think they know something.

That 1970 video will never surface, but if it did I would watch with no expression or surprise whatsoever, as the hippies indeed invaded MacDonald’s residence and executed the attack as MacDonald always described. Meanwhile, the PPS crew would be on collective tilt. What happened to our point 12? What about connect the dot 33 through 59? We had this figured out…that number 137 was the clincher. Not to mention that little hair, the one they’ll clutch like the last branch on the way down.

The O.J. jury got it wrong. Brutally wrong. Disgracefully wrong. But as that verdict was read, F. Lee Bailey understood like nobody else a properly weighted variable. Bailey knew that upon a guilty verdict in a case of that magnitude it would require extensive paperwork and planning, something that would require considerably more time than had passed since jury deliberations had concluded. I remember watching that verdict live and being struck at how Bailey’s reaction was completely unlike anyone else on the defense side. Robert Kardashian was in shock. Johnny Cochran was jubilant. Simpson was almost giddy. As my Las Vegas friends alongside that Monday morning were loudly discussing what had transpired, I was mostly silent and wondering what F. Lee Bailey knew. Plainly he knew something. I awaited Bailey’s summary more than anything else in the aftermath.

And it was terrific later that day when Bailey indeed volunteered that he knew it had to be not guilty, based on duration alone. He wasn’t asked. He provided. Bailey in that court room setting knew that one particular variable was worth exponentially more than anything else attached, even if that variable was mostly ignored or confidently downplayed by others.

Kari Lynn Nixon comes to mind, for me.

To piggyback off Kari Lynn Nixon but in a different direction; I'm in the extreme minority here who doesn't trash her father endlessly for asking her to pick up chips and soda.

I see absolutely nothing wrong in asking your 16 year old kid to walk two whole blocks to run a quick errand for you at 9:00 on a summer night in your tiny town (population 500). He would have never willingly put her in danger if he knew a nutcase was going to be pulling up in front of his neighbors home to grab her off the street at the worst possible moment. It's not like he didn't punish himself every day of his life afterwards.

It's an armchair quarterback situation. Trashing him means you're basically holding it against him for not having psychic powers.

To piggyback off Kari Lynn Nixon but in a different direction; I'm in the extreme minority here who doesn't trash her father endlessly for asking her to pick up chips and soda.

I see absolutely nothing wrong in asking your 16 year old kid to walk two whole blocks to run a quick errand for you at 9:00 on a summer night in your tiny town (population 500). He would have never willingly put her in danger if he knew a nutcase was going to be pulling up in front of his neighbors home to grab her off the street at the worst possible moment. It's not like he didn't punish himself every day of his life afterwards.

It's an armchair quarterback situation. Trashing him means you're basically holding it against him for not having psychic powers.
I feel similarly about Dan Killaby. He missed his date with his wife because he had a few too many beers and couldn't drive, and also didn't call his wife late that night. It was a jerk move, but he certainly had no idea it would lead to her going to a bar and getting killed by a paroled killer. I feel horrible for the guy. He knew he made a mistake, and I'm sure he's spent 20+ years wishing he could take it back.

Wait is Darlie Routier in the upcoming seasons?

I personally believe that there's something mote more to Jennifer Pratt's mother than appears. She seemed kind of snooty to me. (I swear to god every time I saw promo for that damn Passengers film I thought of that case because of her name)

To piggyback off Kari Lynn Nixon but in a different direction; I'm in the extreme minority here who doesn't trash her father endlessly for asking her to pick up chips and soda.

I see absolutely nothing wrong in asking your 16 year old kid to walk two whole blocks to run a quick errand for you at 9:00 on a summer night in your tiny town (population 500). He would have never willingly put her in danger if he knew a nutcase was going to be pulling up in front of his neighbors home to grab her off the street at the worst possible moment. It's not like he didn't punish himself every day of his life afterwards.

It's an armchair quarterback situation. Trashing him means you're basically holding it against him for not having psychic powers.

I wholeheartedly agree. It's not like he sent a six year old waving a handful of $100 bills in the South Bronx to the store at 3:00 am. Not even close. The girl was 16 years old and lived in a town with virtually zero violent crime in the previous 50 years. I'm sure she'd made that walk alone to that same store and back over a hundred times in her teenage years. It was simply wrong place, wrong time.

There is one poster, in fact, who argues one way for a half dozen years or more (innocence) in that Zeigler thread before jump shifting to loud emphasis in the other direction. A variable is suddenly inserted, one that was totally absent and apparently meant nothing 45 years after the crime but upon 47 years it screams guilt: Parties were able to keep a secret. If innocent, someone would have blabbed.

:wave:

I don’t mean to criticize that person, who contributes a lot of energy to this forum. But the Zeigler switchover is a common frail tendency given the tortured point by point emphasis. It’s like being stuck in a maze. You’ve made so many decisions that each seemed sensible at the time but after failing to emerge the desperation level soars and suddenly you are frantically rejecting every choice you’ve made previously.

Dude. It's an Unsolved Mysteries message board. I don't take the cases that serious.

During that Zeigler thread you actually have other posters applauding the approach and the analysis, wanting more of it. That’s the scary aspect. I can’t describe how scary it is. Project to jury deliberation or even earlier, to prosecutors brainstorming how to decipher and present the case. When PPS (Point to Point Simpleton) mode is undertaken, no range of insulting absurdity is out of bounds. PPS is how Leah Askey understands she can invent any story and have it swallowed whole, even if none of her variables make sense as standalone, let alone together. PPS is the reason so many jurors after the fact give asinine rationalizations toward their verdict. They managed to embrace something that meant nothing.

So instead of the PPS mode, shall we adhere to the VBOTMNDS (Vegas betting odds that make no damn sense) mode while discussing cases?

When someone weak is victimized, and someone stronger survives, but we’d really prefer for them to be dead as well, to satisfy a variable, that’s when PPS is unleashed at its most creative and dangerous. Countless sad and tragic cases share that commonality.

Man, why are you so hung up on the fact that MacDonald is guilty?

If I invent as victim of a bizarre crime tonight in my neighborhood, with several dead relatives alongside, and a huge chunk of my story involves a band of distinct perpetrators, there will be no evidence of those perpetrators. It doesn’t matter if I describe four hippies or Three Blind Mice. Nobody will find them or sniff them. Nobody will subsequently volunteer as one of the Blind Mice and be taken seriously. It’s going to be air and blank stares, with suspicion properly directed at me.

Dr. William Petit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders), the Hi-Fi murders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-Fi_murders), Charles Holden, and countless others refute this absurd claim.

The fact that Helena Stoeckley existed is devastating evidence of Jeffrey MacDonald’s innocence. That variable alone overwhelms all the PPS flails, with the laughable concept of crime scene reconstruction, that you can somehow decipher exactly how many were there, who they there, what they did, and it what sequence. Laughable doesn’t do justice to how preposterous that is. Innocent people suffer and will continue to suffer due to societal ignorance of the matter. Cases of that type inspire even loyal family members to become vindictive simpletons.

The fact that Stoeckley existed is no more evidence of his innocence as the fact that (SPOILER ALERT) Santa Claus doesn't exist so therefore he is guilty.

It really doesn’t matter if Stoeckley was later pressured or intimidated or threatened. It matters in justice system terms but not evaluation of the truth. None of those Stoeckley tapes or versions or details would exist upon MacDonald’s utter invention. Jeffrey Toobin understands as much. That’s why he matter of factly stated several years ago that MacDonald’s story is so unusual it’s probably true. Jeffrey Toobin is several sigmas above standard analytical thought. He’s not floundering at ground level or below like the PPS crew.

So Toobin subscribes to the VBOTMNDS method...interesting.

I love the cases that are so simple upon astute big picture scope but the masses waste hours and accumulated months sprawling after the trivial residue. Richard Floyd McCoy is obviously one of my favorites because only three variables matter:

1. He subsequently committed an almost identical skyjacking
2. A skyjacking of that type is so complicated and bold that almost nobody else could pull it off
3. McCoy was known to make an extremely strange and unprecedented drive from Provo to Las Vegas in the hours immediately preceding the DB Cooper event

Rob was DB Cooper.

And that’s all you need. Like the MacDonald case, a handful of variables more than trump everything else combined. But since law enforcement is dependably clueless and uneducated in terms of properly weighting the attached components, an overmatched FBI dullard like Ralph Himmelsbach is placed in charge and throws away years while chasing wind velocity and other commoner crap.

Why don't you pursue a career in law enforcement?

During my Las Vegas decades my favorite time of year was college basketball season. That meant variables and outcomes every day for months. Great profit potential if your method is sound. On Saturdays there would be more than 100 games. My approach to handicapping college basketball could not be more simple. I use preseason ratings of every team first to last and combine with a letter grade of either R, B, C or Z for every team, also based on preseason ratings. And that’s it. No adjustment as the season progresses. I don’t care about momentum or injuries or anything else. I carry around my paperwork and bet the games accordingly all season through the NCAA tournament. It drives the specialized handicappers nuts because my win percentage almost always exceeds theirs even though they devote hours per day to exhaustive study. They can name every player on every team while I might be able to name a handful of players in the entire country.

Oh no...

They know more than I do about the details. But details don’t matter. Details are the foolers. Details require subjective thought, and the associated vulnerability. I’ve tried to explain that to them for decades. Finally several of them reluctantly came around, and asked for copies of my paperwork. I gave it willingly.

In sports betting you have regular results. Methods are tested accordingly, as results surface. I’m talking about real results, not Johnny-Fooled-A-Simpleton court room results.

Why were there so many upsets for week one of college football?

Anyone who believes Jeffrey MacDonald is guilty is a first magnitude simpleton. I don’t have any problem assigning those words because the opposite side routinely peddles terms like stupid or gullible toward those of us aligning with innocence.

:)

It’s always priceless when the PPS troops think they know something.

That 1970 video will never surface, but if it did I would watch with no expression or surprise whatsoever, as the hippies indeed invaded MacDonald’s residence and executed the attack as MacDonald always described. Meanwhile, the PPS crew would be on collective tilt. What happened to our point 12? What about connect the dot 33 through 59? We had this figured out…that number 137 was the clincher. Not to mention that little hair, the one they’ll clutch like the last branch on the way down.

There's a small part of me that believes if MacDonald's current wife's (or his for that matter) health fails while he's still in prison, he just might finally admit to murdering his wife and 2 young daughters to try and get out on parole. If and when that happens, we'll see who's heads will be spinning.

The O.J. jury got it wrong. Brutally wrong. Disgracefully wrong. But as that verdict was read, F. Lee Bailey understood like nobody else a properly weighted variable. Bailey knew that upon a guilty verdict in a case of that magnitude it would require extensive paperwork and planning, something that would require considerably more time than had passed since jury deliberations had concluded. I remember watching that verdict live and being struck at how Bailey’s reaction was completely unlike anyone else on the defense side. Robert Kardashian was in shock. Johnny Cochran was jubilant. Simpson was almost giddy. As my Las Vegas friends alongside that Monday morning were loudly discussing what had transpired, I was mostly silent and wondering what F. Lee Bailey knew. Plainly he knew something. I awaited Bailey’s summary more than anything else in the aftermath.

And it was terrific later that day when Bailey indeed volunteered that he knew it had to be not guilty, based on duration alone. He wasn’t asked. He provided. Bailey in that court room setting knew that one particular variable was worth exponentially more than anything else attached, even if that variable was mostly ignored or confidently downplayed by others.

Congratulations. You've finally said something of substance.

Oo I want to play!

I had forgot about Michael Lloyd Self. I think UM really went out of their way to paint Self like an angel, and that his confessions were coerced. The only problem is that his confessions have some inconsistencies in them. If the police were coercing him, why not get him to match the known facts 100%? I think Self is guilty.

Nice to hear from you both again, Awsi and Cars respectfully. You can add me to the list of posters who fall in line with your thoughts on the Simpson case. It's been hard for me to accept the fact that he was just granted parole in the armed robbery mess, especially when I'm still bitter about the fact that he got away with a violent double murder! But what the hell...if opinions were nickels as my mama likes to say.

Season 7 was by far the worst season of Unsolved Mysteries. Far too much paranormal stuff.

Hate the lost loves segments.

I don't think Hugh Harlin had anything to do with his wife Diane's murder and he left on his own accord to get away from the rumors about it. I think I mentioned this as well, but IMO, Paul Pollis had nothing to do with his wife's disappearance. I think it could've been a burglary gone wrong and the suspects took Charlotte & killed her

Another unpopular opinion, UFO & treasure segments are a waste of a segment to me.

Another unpopular opinion, UFO & treasure segments are a waste of a segment to me.

I think a lot of the treasure ones are too, but I loved the Victorio Peak one having gotten to see it for the first time via Prime.

The government totally stole it.

I think a lot of the treasure ones are too, but I loved the Victorio Peak one having gotten to see it for the first time via Prime.

The government totally stole it.

You are not alone in your opinion of the Victorio Peak segment. Normally I don't really go in for the treasure hunt segments, but this one totally captured my interest. For what it's worth, I think our government got up to no good in this case too...

Hate the lost loves segments.

I always found them to be quite boring as a child. Sorry if that sounds rather heartless. In fact I barely remember most of them, except the Sharon Stevens search for the Zelinski's and a couple of others.

I think I mentioned this as well, but IMO, Paul Pollis had nothing to do with his wife's disappearance. I think it could've been a burglary gone wrong and the suspects took Charlotte & killed her

I agree with that. There's been no evidence that he did anything to her, and there's nothing to say he was abusive. For him to be guilty, he would have had to pull off the perfect crime, and in a short amount of time. I lean towards him not killing her.

I think I mentioned this as well, but IMO, Paul Pollis had nothing to do with his wife's disappearance.

I try to look at everything objectively before jumping to conclusions and try not to let things (positive OR negative) cloud my judgment when it comes to forming an opinion on most anything. I also consider to be quite an open-minded individual when it comes to many things and am willing to try new things (food, music, etc.) pretty much any time. Having said that, I absolutely cannot even fathom how anybody could possibly think that Paul Pollis isn't one of the guiltiest people ever profiled on UM.

Hate the lost loves segments.

I would always change the channel when the lost loves segments came on (now I fast forward through them on Prime). I'd much rather see a wanted, unexplained death case that i knew was solved again, than sit through a lost loves segment.

I agree with that. There's been no evidence that he did anything to her, and there's nothing to say he was abusive. For him to be guilty, he would have had to pull off the perfect crime, and in a short amount of time. I lean towards him not killing her.

Their narrative just reads like a massive stretch and a thing that could only exist in fiction.

The notion his elderly parents disposed of a 300lb woman is absurd, nor that he could have by himself.

Assuming Paul dismembered her where was the blood? The neighbor saw him loading the car in the morning with boxes and bags, her family invaded that evening. If she was in the car in the morning she wasn't in the shed that evening. The cleaning by his parents didn't happen until the days that followed the day she disappeared, so where was the blood? Nothing on the carpets, the kitchen, nothing in the snow by the shed, there would have been something visible the evening they were there before all the cleaning.

"Mommy was put in a dark trash bag". Whole? I don't think so. If the child was able to remember that much, wouldn't they remember she was in pieces? If his parents were willing accomplices wouldn't they have taken the children so that all could have been done unseen?

Every piece of their evidence is a massive leap to the worst imaginable conclusion. The mother keeps her up on the phone till 1:30am because of a cold and then is shocked at 8:50am she's still sleeping. She doesn't answer the phone so she calls back every 10 minutes. It's weird.

Having said that, I absolutely cannot even fathom how anybody could possibly think that Paul Pollis isn't one of the guiltiest people ever profiled on UM.

Agreed. The only other culprit I have in that mind that killed Charlotte was the kitchen floor. Maybe it was too clean from Paul's superb upkeep that she slipped.

OK, I happily skip thru ghosts and UFO ones easily but I LIKED the Lost Loved ones.

However; I always thought it a bit frustrating when these stories had started out with horrific neglect/abuse and even after the reunions and being sent to more stable homes, the now-grown kids STILL resented the authorities for having 'split up their families'. Did they truly think it would have been BETTER to stay in situations where they were constantly abused and/or neglected with their lives in danger? I understand that they would have missed their siblings but why resent having a chance for a better life?

Longtime lurker, first-time poster, after becoming obsessed with UM once again after a serious Amazon binge.

The Lost Loves ones aren't my favorites, but I don't fast forward them. In most instances, I enjoy the historical reenactments.

I guess I feel the same way about the Treasure segments. But there's almost literally never any actual mystery there, and I find them kinda sad for that reason. Those naive individuals featured who spent their lives on those vain searches...

I don't like the UFO episodes and sometimes skip the entirely. I'm not into that type of "mystery" though I will grant that some of them are probably truly a mystery, and they might certainly be unidentified flying objects in the literal sense, it's just that the 'alien' rationale is boring and ridiculous.

The segments that are the worst are the Miracles. Ugh. So lame.

The aesthetic of season 7 onward is terrible compared to the early years. And as has been pointed out frequently, the fluff-to-interesting segment ratio goes down considerably in those seasons. Still, there's some good stuff there, and despite the music and the silly telecenter, it's still still Robert Stack Unsolved Mysteries and that's still damn fine television (as opposed to the Spike reboot, which I won't watch on principle).

1)Ferdinand Marcos Buddha is the only treasure segment worth watching.
2)"Tom Johnson" was Tom Steeples and is now dead.
3)When people post victim's real names who appear in silhouette and fake names and post their real names on the public forum suck

Longtime lurker, first-time poster, after becoming obsessed with UM once again after a serious Amazon binge.

The Lost Loves ones aren't my favorites, but I don't fast forward them. In most instances, I enjoy the historical reenactments.

I guess I feel the same way about the Treasure segments. But there's almost literally never any actual mystery there, and I find them kinda sad for that reason. Those naive individuals featured who spent their lives on those vain searches...

I don't like the UFO episodes and sometimes skip the entirely. I'm not into that type of "mystery" though I will grant that some of them are probably truly a mystery, and they might certainly be unidentified flying objects in the literal sense, it's just that the 'alien' rationale is boring and ridiculous.

The segments that are the worst are the Miracles. Ugh. So lame.

The aesthetic of season 7 onward is terrible compared to the early years. And as has been pointed out frequently, the fluff-to-interesting segment ratio goes down considerably in those seasons. Still, there's some good stuff there, and despite the music and the silly telecenter, it's still still Robert Stack Unsolved Mysteries and that's still damn fine television (as opposed to the Spike reboot, which I won't watch on principle).

Didn't one man even kill him self because he couldn't find a treasure?

All Near death experiences are hallucinations
The Men in Black/UFO segment, the guy just wanted attention.
Robert Stack isn't scary. He was an amazing host, but not scary.

I have a potentially unpopular opinion regarding the Patsy Wright case. I believe that either UM left out some important info during the segment, or LE hasn't been completely forthcoming regarding the case. If Strychnine is such a rare substance that is so strictly regulated by the feds, than why weren't the authorities able to trace the sale?

I don't know...perhaps I'm oversimplifying something that's actually more complex. This just seems like a strange aspect of an already unusual case.

All Near death experiences are hallucinations
The Men in Black/UFO segment, the guy just wanted attention.
Robert Stack isn't scary. He was an amazing host, but not scary.

I agree with first 2. The music and lighting make Robert Stack scary IMO. If you met Stack in a grocery store he would not come off scary.

Yeah, the "eyewitness" that claimed to have an encounter with the MiB hosted a show on the paranormal and UFOs on Austin Public Access TV - which is the same network where Alex Jones got his start. To say he wanted attention is quite the understatement.

Didn't one man even kill him self because he couldn't find a treasure?

Are you talking about the Buddha? IIRC, Roger Roxas was scheduled to testify before the courts about the case, but the day before the trial he died mysteriously, which is basically he got "Marilyn Monroe'd" (knew too much) so he could not testify.

I don't believe that Tammy Lynn Leppert was anywhere near as happy with her career or home life as her mother made it out to be. Nor were some of Tammy's modeling photos appropriate for a teenage girl. The photo of her in the black and white zebra print bathing suit is a perfect example.


I agree. Though I've always wondered how accurate the segment portrayed her behavior. Because on one hand, her behavior is textbook mental illness. Elaborate conspiracy theories and massive paranoia that doesn't really make a lot of sense. There's been speculation that maybe she witnessed a crime while working on a movie set, but I keep thinking of stuff like when she made her stepbrother taste her food because she thought it might be poisoned. If she really believed that some crime syndicate was after her and trying to poison her, why would she have him taste test it? Most people don't want a loved one to be poisoned.

But the segment also said that she had been briefly hospitalized and was released without a diagnosis, which makes me curious. If she was in a psychiatric ward, then she would have been observed and evaluated by people with more than just a layman's knowledge of mental illness. If she was that obviously mentally ill, they probably would have noticed and diagnosed her with something.

But Unsolved Mysteries has been known to leave out information in segments, so someone want to help me out?





If I invent as victim of a bizarre crime tonight in my neighborhood, with several dead relatives alongside, and a huge chunk of my story involves a band of distinct perpetrators, there will be no evidence of those perpetrators. It doesn’t matter if I describe four hippies or Three Blind Mice. Nobody will find them or sniff them. Nobody will subsequently volunteer as one of the Blind Mice and be taken seriously. It’s going to be air and blank stares, with suspicion properly directed at me.

In your hypothetical scenario, law enforcement might consider your testimony to be valid if there was actual, solid physical evidence that these people actually were in the home. Also if there isn't such a massive discrepancy in injuries where a pregnant woman and two small children are hacked up, while the six-foot army officer, who posed the greatest threat to them and had access to the drugs they were after, injuries are relatively mild in comparison. Also if you consistently stuck with your story and didn't have a clear motive for wanting your family dead.


The fact that Helena Stoeckley existed is devastating evidence of Jeffrey MacDonald’s innocence. That variable alone overwhelms all the PPS flails, with the laughable concept of crime scene reconstruction, that you can somehow decipher exactly how many were there, who they there, what they did, and it what sequence. Laughable doesn’t do justice to how preposterous that is. Innocent people suffer and will continue to suffer due to societal ignorance of the matter. Cases of that type inspire even loyal family members to become vindictive simpletons.

You realize how ridiculous the first part of your argument is. You're basically saying, "Jeff said Helena Stoeckley did it. Helena Stoeckley existed; therefore, she did it." By that logic, I can say that George Clooney and I have carried on a torrid love affair for many years. After all, George Clooney does exist, so my story must be true.

As for the second part, nice to know you don't believe in any form of forensics, which can include such things as fingerprinting, ballistics, in addition to DNA. I wonder if you even doubt autopsies. Because since, I don't know, Belle Gunness would deny her multiple murders, than those corpses found on her property that were full of poison, don't mean anything.


It really doesn’t matter if Stoeckley was later pressured or intimidated or threatened. It matters in justice system terms but not evaluation of the truth. None of those Stoeckley tapes or versions or details would exist upon MacDonald’s utter invention.


Again, Helena Stoeckley existed, which proves, in your mind, that she did it.

Though you've never answered one point I keep bringing up. You seem to believe that the justice system is made up entirely of Javerts, who don't care who actually committed the crime, so long as someone hangs for it. But if that's true, then why wouldn't they try to pin it all on Helena? Who do you think would present more of a challenge in court, a wealthy, Princeton-educated doctor with considerable resources at his disposal or an addict so addled as a result of years of drug abuse that it's a miracle she knows what color the sky is on any given day?

I continue to believe that if Jeff wasn't such an attractive, charismatic person, he wouldn't have anywhere near the amount of defenders he does. Though I should also add wealthy and white to the list as well. There's a general profile of people who wind up being convicted of crimes they didn't commit. They tend to be Black or Hispanic, impoverished, the extent of their education being a high school diploma or a GED. Little, if any, of that describes Jeff, unless you believe that rich, white dudes are disproportionately targeted above all other groups in society.

It's really irritating especially in light of cases like Cameron Todd Willingham and Carlos Deluna. Both were of a blue-collar, low-income background, and both were executed for crimes they likely didn't commit. Yet they don't have anywhere near as many cheerleaders as Jeff.

The O.J. jury got it wrong. Brutally wrong. Disgracefully wrong. But as that verdict was read, F. Lee Bailey understood like nobody else a properly weighted variable. Bailey knew that upon a guilty verdict in a case of that magnitude it would require extensive paperwork and planning, something that would require considerably more time than had passed since jury deliberations had concluded. I remember watching that verdict live and being struck at how Bailey’s reaction was completely unlike anyone else on the defense side. Robert Kardashian was in shock. Johnny Cochran was jubilant. Simpson was almost giddy. As my Las Vegas friends alongside that Monday morning were loudly discussing what had transpired, I was mostly silent and wondering what F. Lee Bailey knew. Plainly he knew something. I awaited Bailey’s summary more than anything else in the aftermath.

And it was terrific later that day when Bailey indeed volunteered that he knew it had to be not guilty, based on duration alone. He wasn’t asked. He provided. Bailey in that court room setting knew that one particular variable was worth exponentially more than anything else attached, even if that variable was mostly ignored or confidently downplayed by others.

The O.J. verdict was troubling on so many levels. I re-watched the verdict not that long ago and was stuck by a lot of the things you pointed out. Robert Kardashian DOES, indeed, look shocked. And sick to his stomach. O.J. was giddy. But it's Cochran's response that I find the most appalling. His reaction was not one of, "Excellent, an innocent man was found not guilty," but one that you see someone do when they win a game. The trial was nothing more than a game to Cochran-- it was never about justice. It was never about finding the truth. It was about winning. Disgusting.

My unpopular opinion would be that Tim McClure did not have anything to do with his mother's murder.

I think the exact same thing!

Anyone who could wear a bright pink sweater with a mullet is at the very least unhinged.

The O.J. verdict was troubling on so many levels. I re-watched the verdict not that long ago and was stuck by a lot of the things you pointed out. Robert Kardashian DOES, indeed, look shocked. And sick to his stomach. O.J. was giddy. But it's Cochran's response that I find the most appalling. His reaction was not one of, "Excellent, an innocent man was found not guilty," but one that you see someone do when they win a game. The trial was nothing more than a game to Cochran-- it was never about justice. It was never about finding the truth. It was about winning. Disgusting.

Well that is the legal system for you-not about the truth but who can present the best & the defence automatically have the advantage because they don't have to prove anything, just throw enough doubt out there. The prosecution already had enough problems with the forensics handling & some of their witnesses, getting OJ to stop taking his arthritis medicine so that his hands swelled up was a masterstroke.

The O.J. verdict was troubling on so many levels. I re-watched the verdict not that long ago and was stuck by a lot of the things you pointed out. Robert Kardashian DOES, indeed, look shocked. And sick to his stomach. O.J. was giddy. But it's Cochran's response that I find the most appalling. His reaction was not one of, "Excellent, an innocent man was found not guilty," but one that you see someone do when they win a game. The trial was nothing more than a game to Cochran-- it was never about justice. It was never about finding the truth. It was about winning. Disgusting.

I was in high school when the verdict came down. My math teacher ended his lecture 15 minutes early and then turned on his portable radio so we could all listen to the verdict.

I couldn't agree more with your post. I always thought Cochran's reaction was a joke. But Robert Kardashian's reaction was always the most telling. He looks in complete shock and disbelief. Not the kind of reaction you'd expect from a member of your defense and close friend.

I agree with first 2. The music and lighting make Robert Stack scary IMO. If you met Stack in a grocery store he would not come off scary.

More eerie than scary, my dad used to joke that he thought he had been embalmed. Think The Undertaker copied him for his character.

I was in high school when the verdict came down. My math teacher ended his lecture 15 minutes early and then turned on his portable radio so we could all listen to the verdict.

I couldn't agree more with your post. I always thought Cochran's reaction was a joke. But Robert Kardashian's reaction was always the most telling. He looks in complete shock and disbelief. Not the kind of reaction you'd expect from a member of your defense and close friend.

It's amazing what time does to one's perspective. Back in the day, I thought Kardashian was a slime ball. Looking back, I'm not sure why I thought that. Maybe it's because since that time (I was also in high school when the verdict came down and classes were actually interrupted to announce said verdict), I've defended numerous folks I knew to be guilty and gotten an acquittal. Based on that added life experience, I feel like I have a general idea of what was happening at that moment.

Robert Kardashian was quite likely the only one on the "Dream Team" with a proper sense of ethics. The fact that he cut ties from O.J. after the trial says volumes. It's even more compounded when he's interviewed by Barbara Walters and comments that both he and Al Cowlings "had doubt" about O.J.'s innocence-- the two guys that knew him the best. How telling is that? Added to the fact that his defense of O.J. did not help him in matters with his ex-wife Kris Jenner-- although I think he dodged a huge bullet there. I have said on more than one occasion that if Kardashian were alive today, there would be no "Keeping up with the Kardashians" or any of that crap. He was too classy for such trash.

If you haven't watched "American Crime Story: The People vs. O.J. Simpson," I'd recommend it. I initially scoffed when I heard David Schwimmer had been cast as Robert Kardashian. He nails it and you can't help but just feel for Kardashian, who I think only realized O.J. did it when confronted with the DNA evidence. Courtney B. Vance plays Cochran and I found myself getting very angry with him over the course of the miniseries-- safe to say that Vance earned his Emmy for his portrayal. And of course, Sarah Paulson just kills it as Marcia Clark, who was outgunned from the beginning. Definitely worth the watch.

I think Chad Noe had some involvement with the deaths of Wendy and the others.

I look at most of the fraud victims and honestly I find them all stupid. I don't want to sound mean but I can't be sympathetic.

Sharon Kinne died in Mexico lbr. Cartel probably killed her.
The only fraud victim I felt bad for was Ellen Berry. She was extremely wealthy yet extremely vulnerable which is a bad mix

More eerie than scary, my dad used to joke that he thought he had been embalmed. Think The Undertaker copied him for his character.

The Undertaker would make a good host for unsolved mysteries. Maybe after he retires he could bring back unsolved mysteries.

There was absolutely no foul play involved in Amy Bradley’s disappearance. She simply fell overboard and died mere moments later by drowning. She didn’t profile as nearly as much of a “target” for human trafficking as her mother claimed on the UM broadcast either. Like, not even a little bit IMO.

Agreed, I don't think those pictures look like her either and where is this 80s hair coming from?

There was absolutely no foul play involved in Amy Bradley’s disappearance. She simply fell overboard and died mere moments later by drowning. She didn’t profile as nearly as much of a “target” for human trafficking as her mother claimed on the UM broadcast either. Like, not even a little bit IMO.

The one thing that frustrates me about this case is that her brother, and father had both said that she returned to the cabin the night before the ship docked. Her brother said they were partying hard so she was going to stay on the deck to get some fresh air. Her father said he woke up around 4 or 5 in the morning and saw her laying on the balcony. So when exactly would she have been sold into sexual slavery? It's obvious she was ill from partying and went overboard.

I also can't stand the manic idiots who are bombarding Douglas Alistar's facebook/youtube trying to ruin his life when there's zero evidence against him. In the video it's obvious that Amy was drunk dancing ON Douglas. Now people are trying to say that he drugged her??? Ugh.

I really don't think she was sold into slavery either. She fell overboard. Simple as that. I mean its as if thry expect to see breaking news that a slavery ring was busyed and among those rescued were Amy Bradley, Natalee Hollaway, Chandra Levy, and Lacie Peterson.

I think Dale Kersetter was in on it. But his partner in crime turned on him and took his life.

Folks who were scammed for money in a romantic/sexual way get no sympathy from me. It was their thirst!

Folks who were scammed for money in a romantic/sexual way get no sympathy from me. It was their thirst!

Same with the Spanish Lottery and Pyramid scams & cons in general-most of them were already wealthy beyond belief, yet their greed made them invest everything or nearly everything in something too good to be true.

Billy Ray Hargrove committed suicide, but Mike Carmichael was a foul play/murder situation. I also believe Chuck Morgan and Tommy Burkett were murdered. Other than that, I think all the suicides are suicides (that I've seen so far, I'm on season 7).

If I never see another Treasure or UFO segment again, it'll be too soon. Same with the ghost stories. I can't skip them because I watch UM with my mother and she enjoys all of those but I can feel my soul leaving my body every time I have to endure one.

I have trouble mustering a lot of sympathy for Judy Olive.

My opinion is unpopular because ghosts, space aliens, and magic rocks rank among my favorites.

I have trouble mustering a lot of sympathy for Judy Olive.

She's definitely frustrating in the sense that she made some bad choices and she SHOULD have seen all the red flags in regards to the first meeting with Ulysses. But at the end of the day, she was still a victim so I can't help but feel sympathy for her.

But frustration, lot's of frustration too.

She's definitely frustrating in the sense that she made some bad choices and she SHOULD have seen all the red flags in regards to the first meeting with Ulysses. But at the end of the day, she was still a victim so I can't help but feel sympathy for her.

But frustration, lot's of frustration too.

I couldn't agree more. It's obvious Judy was very naive at that time, but like you said she is a victim, too. She never would have gone back had she known how this would end. It's also a lot harder from abused women to break free that it seems. I also have lots of sympathy for her.

I have trouble mustering a lot of sympathy for Judy Olive.

What's the Judy Olive case about? I'm not familiar with it.

What's the Judy Olive case about? I'm not familiar with it.

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

Oo I want to play!

Guilty without question
Thomas Drake

Innocent without question

Port Chicago Seamen

Just curious to your take on these two, Meg.

Drake because I don't think you've commented, or if you have I haven't seen it.

I put "innocent with some question" for Port Chicago because, they did technically refuse to follow orders. Aren't they guilty of that at least? I thought the military was strict liability on such things. Whether their decision was justified is another matter (I believe they were justified). Figured you would be the best person to ask regardless.

Agreed.

Another example for me would be the Keith Warren case. As far as I can tell, everyone on here, including me, believed he was either murdered or died accidentally and some of his friends freaked out and made it look like a suicide. Suicide was never an option. Until I saw more information related to the case I realized that suicide was a possibility, and the UM segment presented a decent case for murder by some shady people that could've been involved with drugs (Mark Finley was one of them). Then years later I saw a local news station report on the case that was filmed prior to the UM segment where it was alleged that Keith was lynched and it was a racially motivated hate crime. The UM segment makes no mention of this, and specifically says that a car full of black teens/men were looking for him shortly before he died. This was known back when Keith was found dead. Why the sudden change of a motive in the span of 3-4 years? - Im not sure if you worked for MCMPD or affiliated with them some how, but you always find a way to throw Keith's name in a post and try to discredit the possibility that he was murdered. Before you continue to mis-quote me and use alternative facts to discuss my brother's murder, I respectfully ask that you read up on the information and share accurate information and not your opinion as fact.

wow, from what I remember it was overwhelmingly believed that Keith Warren died accidentally and the suicide was staged. What made you decide to go against that theory? - Please research information for yourself go to www.TheKeithWarrenJusticeSite.com. For whatever reason "TheCars1986" has something against my brother and will use lies and deceit to make his point. I am addressing as many of his post about Kieth as possible. He has mis quoted me and used deception and half truth to make his point. This is very upsetting and I believe he is somehow some way associated directly with MCMPD

- I believe he is somehow some way associated directly with MCMPD

Or he's just a fan of Unsolved Mysteries and was giving his opinion on one of many cases profiled on that show.

Or he's just a fan of Unsolved Mysteries and was giving his opinion on one of many cases profiled on that show.
When you mis-quote me intentionally or put out alternative facts that is not a fan to me that is someone who wants to make their point with no regard to truth.

When you mis-quote me intentionally or put out alternative facts that is not a fan to me that is someone who wants to make their point with no regard to truth.

Or they're someone with limited access to the information and theorizing based off what they have. I realize from your postings today that you're likely either a sibling or close relative, and obviously this is personal for you, but you can't expect viewers of a TV show from the 80's to have access to everything dug up by your mother over decades of investigation. People are going off of an 8 minute segment from 30 years ago and google.

Or they're someone with limited access to the information and theorizing based off what they have. I realize from your postings today that you're likely either a sibling or close relative, and obviously this is personal for you, but you can't expect viewers of a TV show from the 80's to have access to everything dug up by your mother over decades of investigation. People are going off of an 8 minute segment from 30 years ago and google.- For clarification this is Sherri Warren (Keith Warren's sister) and the post I mention were all referenced back to a dated website. if I am going to be quoted, then I request the quote be accurate, if you are going to reference information which is public information I would please ask that the information be accurate and not half truth.

Delete

Or they're someone with limited access to the information and theorizing based off what they have. I realize from your postings today that you're likely either a sibling or close relative, and obviously this is personal for you, but you can't expect viewers of a TV show from the 80's to have access to everything dug up by your mother over decades of investigation. People are going off of an 8 minute segment from 30 years ago and google.

Stop making excuses. There's having limited information, and then there's twisting the limited information to fit your narrative. That's what TheCars is doing. I hope you find the truth, Sherri. We both know you're correct.

Stop making excuses. There's having limited information, and then there's twisting the limited information to fit your narrative. That's what TheCars is doing. I hope you find the truth, Sherri. We both know you're correct.

I agree I have found several posts where he has for whatever reason inserted Keiths name when it it comes to mysterious deaths and or suicide related deaths not sure what that's about. My point is if you going to quote information you need to be correct and don't intentionally mislead people.

I agree I have found several posts where he has for whatever reason inserted Keiths name when it it comes to mysterious deaths and or suicide related deaths not sure what that's about. My point is if you going to quote information you need to be correct and don't intentionally mislead people.

It is always nice to have family members of people profiled on UM posting. However in my past experience as moderator on here I have encountered some relatives who have taken offense at people's opinion on their loved ones cases. Those people have found it is easier for them to just stop reading the posts. Remember this is an online forum to discuss our opinions on UM cases and it is based on the limited information we are given. It is certainly not a slight on your brother or his tragic death. We are simply talking about a case that was profiled on UM. There is no malicious intent nor are we emotionally invested as you are. It is a discussion forum. There is nothing wrong with TheCars giving his opinion on the segment because this is exactly what this forum is about.

It is always nice to have family members of people profiled on UM posting. However in my past experience as moderator on here I have encountered some relatives who have taken offense at people's opinion on their loved ones cases. Those people have found it is easier for them to just stop reading the posts. Remember this is an online forum to discuss our opinions on UM cases and it is based on the limited information we are given. It is certainly not a slight on your brother or his tragic death. We are simply talking about a case that was profiled on UM. There is no malicious intent nor are we emotionally invested as you are. It is a discussion forum. There is nothing wrong with TheCars giving his opinion on the segment because this is exactly what this forum is about.

Im grateful and thankful that Keith's story is being talked about. What I am not a fan of is someone mis-quoting me or putting out information the is not fact. I appreciate the thoughts and opinion of others when they are based off of fact.

I really don't think she was sold into slavery either. She fell overboard. Simple as that. I mean its as if thry expect to see breaking news that a slavery ring was busyed and among those rescued were Amy Bradley, Natalee Hollaway, Chandra Levy, and Lacie Peterson.

You can add a lot more names to that list. I think Amy Billig would be marching out also.

Tiresome topic. Wastes plenty of time. I'm older than most here and remember true crime cases from decades ago that may not have had DNA discussion but at least we weren't bogged down by crap like human trafficking.

Of course, as soon as you say something like that then naturally you're bombarded with the..."more common that you think it is"...posts.

Sorry. My mistake. We'll adjust the likelihood from .003 to .0086

Just curious to your take on these two, Meg.

Drake because I don't think you've commented, or if you have I haven't seen it.

I put "innocent with some question" for Port Chicago because, they did technically refuse to follow orders. Aren't they guilty of that at least? I thought the military was strict liability on such things. Whether their decision was justified is another matter (I believe they were justified). Figured you would be the best person to ask regardless.

Drake is twofold:

1. Drake had a clear motive to get his wife out of the picture.
2. I have always thought Nancy's behavior post-attack was suspicious and more than a little indicative of a submissive partner covering for an abusive partner, as they are often unfortunately wont to do. I also highly suspect she never suffered from amnesia, and recalled the lurking man around the church in the course of searching for a way to let Thomas off the hook.

The Port Chicago sailors did disobey orders, but I do think that the more serious charge--mutiny--was not at all applicable in that case.

I'm maybe a little better than a barracks lawyer in my understanding of military justice, but disobeying a direct order isn't necessarily something a service member will always be punished for under certain conditions, even if he or she was charged with doing so initially. This applies especially if the order is found to be unlawful. In fact, service members are actually compelled to disobey orders they know to be unlawful, such as Lieutenant Calley's rampage through My Lai, and can be liable to prosecution for obeying such orders.

Long time lurker finally starting to post here. As a general rule I agree with the majority of both cases but here are a few unpopular opinions:

1)Jule Caylor is not only innocent, but I actually believe him. He is a very unlikable, miserable guy but makes no attempt to hide who he is. I believe Dottie ran off and, being naïve, into the wrong hands. He obviously doesn't care but that doesn't mean he killed her.
2)I am not convinced Stephen Marfeo is guilty. Yes, I am fully aware of what happened to him in the end but he probably snapped at that point after being called a murderer once again. He DID however come across as someone with a bad temper and I can see why so many would scream "GUILTY!"
3)Tim McClure and Hugh Harlin are innocent. It seems both these guys are seen as guilty mostly because they are 'weird'. Being a weirdo is not a crime and does not automatically make you a potential murderer.

Long time lurker finally starting to post here. As a general rule I agree with the majority of both cases but here are a few unpopular opinions:

1)Jule Caylor is not only innocent, but I actually believe him. He is a very unlikable, miserable guy but makes no attempt to hide who he is. I believe Dottie ran off and, being naïve, into the wrong hands. He obviously doesn't care but that doesn't mean he killed her.
2)I am not convinced Stephen Marfeo is guilty. Yes, I am fully aware of what happened to him in the end but he probably snapped at that point after being called a murderer once again. He DID however come across as someone with a bad temper and I can see why so many would scream "GUILTY!"
3)Tim McClure and Hugh Harlin are innocent. It seems both these guys are seen as guilty mostly because they are 'weird'. Being a weirdo is not a crime and does not automatically make you a potential murderer.

I completely disagree with you re: Caylor and Marfeo, but I love seeing new folks pop up! Welcome! :wave:

Being a weirdo is not a crime and does not automatically make you a potential murderer.

Thank God, because I'd really be screwed... :lol:

Long time lurker finally starting to post here. As a general rule I agree with the majority of both cases but here are a few unpopular opinions:

1)Jule Caylor is not only innocent, but I actually believe him. He is a very unlikable, miserable guy but makes no attempt to hide who he is. I believe Dottie ran off and, being naïve, into the wrong hands. He obviously doesn't care but that doesn't mean he killed her.
2)I am not convinced Stephen Marfeo is guilty. Yes, I am fully aware of what happened to him in the end but he probably snapped at that point after being called a murderer once again. He DID however come across as someone with a bad temper and I can see why so many would scream "GUILTY!"
3)Tim McClure and Hugh Harlin are innocent. It seems both these guys are seen as guilty mostly because they are 'weird'. Being a weirdo is not a crime and does not automatically make you a potential murderer.

Wow, you didnt merely join the game, you really went 'all in' didn't you! :D

Hi everyone! Long-time lurker, first time poster. The topic peaked my interest so figure throw my 2 cents in:

- I feel the boyfriend of Angela Hammond isn't being truthful at best and is guilty at worst. From what I know of the case, all we have is the boyfriend's word and not much corroborating evidence. Maybe I'm wrong and someone can point some evidence out?

Another one came to mind while I was watching old episodes on Amazon.

Curtis Heck didn’t kill Kenneth Engy

Hi everyone! Long-time lurker, first time poster. The topic peaked my interest so figure throw my 2 cents in:

- I feel the boyfriend of Angela Hammond isn't being truthful at best and is guilty at worst. From what I know of the case, all we have is the boyfriend's word and not much corroborating evidence. Maybe I'm wrong and someone can point some evidence out?

Welcome. We're going to get along great. I like you. :wave:

Your post freakbook was the first post I've seen that has cast doubt on the "given facts" on this case. I'm much like a lot of people on this board where we look at the evidence and it speaks for itself, that's why unless I'm missing something I'm surprised more doubt hasn't been cast on hammond's boyfriend. Interested in others takes. And thanks for welcoming me!!

Your post freakbook was the first post I've seen that has cast doubt on the "given facts" on this case. I'm much like a lot of people on this board where we look at the evidence and it speaks for itself, that's why unless I'm missing something I'm surprised more doubt hasn't been cast on hammond's boyfriend. Interested in others takes. And thanks for welcoming me!!


Stick around, it's like that with every case that I talk about, that's why I'm so loved ;) :p

I think I'm the only one who has the opinion that Carolyn Killaby's (victim of Dennis Keith Smith) husband is a lousy douchy a-hole. A lot of people have sympathy for HIM. Screw him. I feel sorry for HER.

Although he certainly didn't deserve what happened to him, Jimmy Aprille struck me as smug and condescending. He seemed to me like he would have been a chore to live with. He said his wife as "the epitome of greed"? Yeah, Melvine was 150% wrong for what she did, but don't get it twisted, Jimmy. She was basically raising your kids as a single parent most of the time because you were married to your job even though you had more money than most people could ever dream of. Couldn't that also be considered greed?

I think I'm the only one who has the opinion that Carolyn Killaby's (victim of Dennis Keith Smith) husband is a lousy douchy a-hole. A lot of people have sympathy for HIM. Screw him. I feel sorry for HER.

No sympathy at all? I agree that it was douchey to blow his wife off for the night to drink with his brother. But his wife was still raped and murdered by a freak who should never have been released from prison for ANOTHER murder he committed.

How does that not garner at least a little sympathy for the husband?

No sympathy at all? I agree that it was douchey to blow his wife off for the night to drink with his brother. But his wife was still raped and murdered by a freak who should never have been released from prison for ANOTHER murder he committed.

How does that not garner at least a little sympathy for the husband?

I've never felt any sympathy for him. Never liked that guy. That's why I posted it as an unpopular opinion.

Although he certainly didn't deserve what happened to him, Jimmy Aprille struck me as smug and condescending. He seemed to me like he would have been a chore to live with. He said his wife as "the epitome of greed"? Yeah, Melvine was 150% wrong for what she did, but don't get it twisted, Jimmy. She was basically raising your kids as a single parent most of the time because you were married to your job even though you had more money than most people could ever dream of. Couldn't that also be considered greed?

Not only that, but she ran the business while Jimmy had his health issues. He still felt that she took "his" money. :rolleyes:

Agree on this one 100%.

I'm surprised more doubt hasn't been cast on hammond's boyfriend. Interested in others takes. And thanks for welcoming me!!
I don't have a strong opinion either way but it does puzzle me that the Rob Shafer seems to get a free pass, both here and on the show. The motive is right there with the young, unmarried and likely unexpectantly pregnant woman and that seems to get brushed over, especially when I think of the unfair suspicion levelled against Steve Bechtel.

I personally lean towards Kenneth McDuff as the likely perp but I find it interesting how quickly Rob was cleared. Maybe there is something we don't know?

Maybe there is something we don't know?

No, you guys are on the right track. Some people look at UM like it's a drama, or soap opera and forget that some of these cases are real. Some people on here also seem to forget that people lie, and don't always tell the truth.

Apparently Angela said everything in the description of the vehicle, and the perp, but not the licence plate. She said everything but the most important detail. Rob also apparently drove behind him and didn't say anything about a license plate. Seems more fishier than the decal on the back of the invisible truck.

I think I'm the only one who has the opinion that Carolyn Killaby's (victim of Dennis Keith Smith) husband is a lousy douchy a-hole. A lot of people have sympathy for HIM. Screw him. I feel sorry for HER.

Nope, I'm with you on that.

I think I'm the only one who has the opinion that Carolyn Killaby's (victim of Dennis Keith Smith) husband is a lousy douchy a-hole. A lot of people have sympathy for HIM. Screw him. I feel sorry for HER.

I also didn't hold much sympathy for him. I readily admit blowing off his 'very romantic' night to hang with his brother at a bar influenced me on that. I can't say I hold none, because his wife was still killed, but I just can't be overly sympathetic. Their romantic evening was supposed to be because they had recently had marital issues and were trying to fix things, yet he still blew her off. Just rubbed me the wrong way.

No, you guys are on the right track. Some people look at UM like it's a drama, or soap opera and forget that some of these cases are real. Some people on here also seem to forget that people lie, and don't always tell the truth.

Apparently Angela said everything in the description of the vehicle, and the perp, but not the licence plate. She said everything but the most important detail. Rob also apparently drove behind him and didn't say anything about a license plate. Seems more fishier than the decal on the back of the invisible truck.

After maybe the car and perp descript, the license plate should be one of the first things looked at if you're in a shady situation IMO. The fact that she described everything but that according to Rob raises my suspicions even more. Also, you have all these cases where the boyfriend/spouse is guilty until proven innocent, this case not so much. Not saying that's a good thing but makes me wonder why the lack of suspicion of the boyfriend. Kinda weird.

After maybe the car and perp descript, the license plate should be one of the first things looked at if you're in a shady situation IMO. The fact that she described everything but that according to Rob raises my suspicions even more. Also, you have all these cases where the boyfriend/spouse is guilty until proven innocent, this case not so much. Not saying that's a good thing but makes me wonder why the lack of suspicion of the boyfriend. Kinda weird.

Outside of gullible people being fooled by the Hollywood, tragic teenage love story, I think its the fact that her mother said she believed Rob was innocent, and that the police "cleared" him. Which means absolutely nothing at all since no other suspects popped up. They couldn't find anything and let him go, also with support from her mother they just shrugged it off.

Re the Angela Hammond Disappearance:

Supposedly her fiance gave chase to the alleged mystery kidnapper through the streets of this tiny town in the middle of night but a mechanical mishap prevented him from catching up:

So how was it that no one else in that tiny town witnessed or heard that chase happen at an hour when there was virtually no traffic?

That part I never quite bought.

Re the Angela Hammond Disappearance:

Supposedly her fiance gave chase to the alleged mystery kidnapper through the streets of this tiny town in the middle of night but a mechanical mishap prevented him from catching up:

So how was it that no one else in that tiny town witnessed or heard that chase happen at an hour when there was virtually no traffic?

That part I never quite bought.

Two witnesses saw the man sitting in the truck near the phone booth, but I do not think anyone witnessed the chase.

Two witnesses saw the man sitting in the truck near the phone booth, but I do not think anyone witnessed the chase.

I find it weird that this guy was so standoutish to catch these people's attention but no one thought to look at his license plate? Two witnesses described his look exactly the same, but didn't think that such a standout character didn't deserve his license plate looked at?

Witnesses lie all the time, especially if theyre cool with the accused. Larry Gibson's neighbor lied about a random car taking Tommy. Just more liars who were in Robs corner

I find it weird that this guy was so standoutish to catch these people's attention but no one thought to look at his license plate? Two witnesses described his look exactly the same, but didn't think that such a standout character didn't deserve his license plate looked at?

Witnesses lie all the time, especially if theyre cool with the accused. Larry Gibson's neighbor lied about a random car taking Tommy. Just more liars who were in Robs corner

I agree about the Larry Gibson witness. Rob is another story. He may have had a possible motive (Angela Hammond being pregnant), but I see no way he had the means or opportunity to commit this crime. But I suppose that is the whole purpose of this thread

I agree about the Larry Gibson witness. Rob is another story. He may have had a possible motive (Angela Hammond being pregnant), but I see no way he had the means or opportunity to commit this crime. But I suppose that is the whole purpose of this thread

If he's lying then he had enough time. If you substitute the entire chase scene with him killing/hiding her body then it makes sense.

If we replaced him hiding the body instead of chasing Casper then it fits.

Some unpopular opinions of mine:

a) Elaine Parent acted alone when she killed Beverly McGowan, and that she was indeed "Sam". No male accomplice.

b) There are no such thing as mediums; it's all woo-woo. Their "help" is wasting precious time and resources. Sometimes, they even end up hurting people that might have been innocent all along (like in Sherry Eyerly's case). Every time UM mentions the presence of a medium, I sigh and shake my head.

c) The Black Dahlia case and the Cleveland Torso Murders are totally unrelated.

d) Amy Billig died within hours of her kidnapping, and it was a random kidnap while she was hitchhiking, like so many tragic victims. My belief, while it is very sad for Susan (RIP), is that by pursuing the biker trail she was, in fact, following a red herring that was grossly exploited by Paul Branch and his widow for financial gains.

e) One poster argued here that Bradford Bishop might never have left the Smokey Mountains. I tend to agree, part of me has always had a strong suspicion he might have committed suicide deep in the Mountains, somewhere, and that his body was never found.

f) I am baffled by how underwhelming and soft the coverage of Ricardo Caputo was in the UM segment, and even here there are very few discussions around him. I get that Caputo was a very mysterious man, but so are many perps discussed in UM. This guy was the quintessential lady-killer; a cad who had the uncanny ability to get in the panties of any woman he would encounter (even his own psychiatrist), only to violently murder them as soon as they got their guards down.

Not only that, but she ran the business while Jimmy had his health issues. He still felt that she took "his" money. :rolleyes:

Agree on this one 100%.

Well, he had so many health issues that he was on verge of actually dying. How bad and wicked of a man to expect that his wife would back him in a time where even rising from the bed might kill him. The monster. :rolleyes:

And yeah, it's "his" money. Which, by marriage, became "their" money because it was putting bread and butter on the table and jewelry on her, all thanks to his hard work.

If she wanted her rightful share of the money, all she had to do was to divorce and ask for alimony, which she would have been entitled to anyway because as a SAHM she had no independent means of income. Instead, she decided to scam him under his nose, exploiting his poor health and his vulnerability, and run away with all the money.

And let's not forget, he did state that he did not care all that much about the money. What he cared about was his children, which she stole away from him. The poor woman! Cry me a river. It's any husband's (or man's, for that matter) worst nightmare, on-par with catching red-handed his wife cheating in his bed.

I had a lot of sympathy for Jimmy Aprile, on the contrary. The guy was not perfect, but as far as we know he did not deserve a payback like this. Jimmy Aprile might have been too absorbed by his work and his business, which in itself could drive couples apart and cause a divorce, but that was so that his family - including herself - would not need anything.

The guy trusted his wife blindly because he was sure he could count on her 100%, while she was ripping him off of everything he had only to leave him with a measly 12$ in his account with his children nowhere to be found. He got had by his own wife while he was trying to stay alive, for crying out loud!

f) I am baffled by how underwhelming and soft the coverage of Ricardo Caputo was in the UM segment, and even here there are very few discussions around him. I get that Caputo was a very mysterious man, but so are many perps discussed in UM. This guy was the quintessential lady-killer; a cad who had the uncanny ability to get in the panties of any woman he would encounter (even his own psychiatrist), only to violently murder them as soon as they got their guards down.

Agreed 100%. The interest in him really seems passive given that he's a mass murderer.

Maybe people are just that impressed with his ability to grow the biggest tomatoes.

How's this for an unpopular opinion?

While I am a huge classic UM and Robert Stack fan and consider it the best show ever made (until I came here I thought I was in the running for the world's largest UM fan), I actually like the Dennis Farina segments and feel they are very much underappreciated. Given what a crappy hand he was dealt with the awful music and graphics and always filming at that fake NASA station I thought he did a fantastic job as host. That's not even getting into how Spike kept moving the show around and irregularly broadcast it, mainly after everyone was sound asleep and DVRs weren't commonplace.

As for particular cases, I always felt that at best Penny Cayedito knew FAR more than she was letting on about Anthonette. Too bad we will never know the truth. Maybe it's because of a local case where a mother reported her 12 year old daughter missing. It was later proven she murdered her own kid because her boyfriend told her she had to choose between him and her child.

Agreed 100%. The interest in him really seems passive given that he's a mass murderer.

Maybe people are just that impressed with his ability to grow the biggest tomatoes.

To be fair, at the end of the segment RS did advise that for obvious reasons he was to be considered extremely dangerous - and that he should not be directly confronted. This was very rare that RS would reiterate that with emphasis, to make the point perfectly clear.

However, the remaining part of the segment itself was rather underwhelming. It was a litany of his seduction attempts, his relationships, and the bodies he would leave behind. No real insight on the killer, even if his identity was well-known, except that he was a master manipulator. This was a case where it would have been warranted to have a Jack Levin in the segment, to explain the psychology of this atypical killer.

How's this for an unpopular opinion?

While I am a huge classic UM and Robert Stack fan and consider it the best show ever made (until I came here I thought I was in the running for the world's largest UM fan), I actually like the Dennis Farina segments and feel they are very much underappreciated. Given what a crappy hand he was dealt with the awful music and graphics and always filming at that fake NASA station I thought he did a fantastic job as host. That's not even getting into how Spike kept moving the show around and irregularly broadcast it, mainly after everyone was sound asleep and DVRs weren't commonplace.

I actually agree with that one. I always liked Farina as an actor, and thought he did a good job as host, on his own merits. But, exactly as you said, he was kind of given a soup sandwich of a presentation. That wasn't his fault, though.

How's this for an unpopular opinion?

While I am a huge classic UM and Robert Stack fan and consider it the best show ever made (until I came here I thought I was in the running for the world's largest UM fan), I actually like the Dennis Farina segments and feel they are very much underappreciated. Given what a crappy hand he was dealt with the awful music and graphics and always filming at that fake NASA station I thought he did a fantastic job as host. That's not even getting into how Spike kept moving the show around and irregularly broadcast it, mainly after everyone was sound asleep and DVRs weren't commonplace.

As for particular cases, I always felt that at best Penny Cayedito knew FAR more than she was letting on about Anthonette. Too bad we will never know the truth. Maybe it's because of a local case where a mother reported her 12 year old daughter missing. It was later proven she murdered her own kid because her boyfriend told her she had to choose between him and her child.


If you're talking about Farina solely then yes I agree. He did the best he could and would have potentially been a fine host if he had been given better material to work with



The actual revamp overall though is still too badly done and pointless to have much redeeming actors though

Agreed 100%. The interest in him really seems passive given that he's a mass murderer.

Maybe people are just that impressed with his ability to grow the biggest tomatoes.

He would not be considered a Mass Murderer. A mass murderer is what S Paddock in Las Vegas was. I'm not convinced he was a serial killer. Hitmen aren't usually classified as serials. This guy was an opportunistic killer if anything.

He would not be considered a Mass Murderer. A mass murderer is what S Paddock in Las Vegas was. I'm not convinced he was a serial killer. Hitmen aren't usually classified as serials. This guy was an opportunistic killer if anything.

Good point.

Mass murder was a poor choice of words, but I just mean't it in a "killed a good number of women" way, not blew up a coliseum way.

Well, he had so many health issues that he was on verge of actually dying. How bad and wicked of a man to expect that his wife would back him in a time where even rising from the bed might kill him. The monster. :rolleyes:

And yeah, it's "his" money. Which, by marriage, became "their" money because it was putting bread and butter on the table and jewelry on her, all thanks to his hard work.

If she wanted her rightful share of the money, all she had to do was to divorce and ask for alimony, which she would have been entitled to anyway because as a SAHM she had no independent means of income. Instead, she decided to scam him under his nose, exploiting his poor health and his vulnerability, and run away with all the money.

And let's not forget, he did state that he did not care all that much about the money. What he cared about was his children, which she stole away from him. The poor woman! Cry me a river. It's any husband's (or man's, for that matter) worst nightmare, on-par with catching red-handed his wife cheating in his bed.

I had a lot of sympathy for Jimmy Aprile, on the contrary. The guy was not perfect, but as far as we know he did not deserve a payback like this. Jimmy Aprile might have been too absorbed by his work and his business, which in itself could drive couples apart and cause a divorce, but that was so that his family - including herself - would not need anything.

The guy trusted his wife blindly because he was sure he could count on her 100%, while she was ripping him off of everything he had only to leave him with a measly 12$ in his account with his children nowhere to be found. He got had by his own wife while he was trying to stay alive, for crying out loud!

https://media1.tenor.com/images/03681456584cbc392357d9fe71124143/tenor.gif?itemid=5636901

You bring up so many excellent points. The most important one being that all she had to do was divorce him. She still would have gotten alimony and had access to her kids. Instead, she took all of the kids and all of the money.

Was it really worth the five years she ended up being in prison and out of her children's lives? (Although I'm kind of surprised she only got five years for theft, fraud, forgery and abduction.)

To piggyback off Kari Lynn Nixon but in a different direction; I'm in the extreme minority here who doesn't trash her father endlessly for asking her to pick up chips and soda.

I see absolutely nothing wrong in asking your 16 year old kid to walk two whole blocks to run a quick errand for you at 9:00 on a summer night in your tiny town (population 500). He would have never willingly put her in danger if he knew a nutcase was going to be pulling up in front of his neighbors home to grab her off the street at the worst possible moment. It's not like he didn't punish himself every day of his life afterwards.

It's an armchair quarterback situation. Trashing him means you're basically holding it against him for not having psychic powers.

I have a huge problem with someone who pries their daughter away from doing their homework to get him snacks and sends her out at night in New York because he's too lazy to get up off his fat ass and get them himself, then promptly goes to watch tv and falls asleep and doesn't even realize until the next day (!!) that his daughter is missing, when it turns out she's been kidnapped, raped and murdered. Women and girls are unfortunately raped all the time (and that includes in small towns).

This goes beyond just bad and/or negligent parenting, I hold him indirectly responsible!

I have a huge problem with someone who pries their daughter away from doing their homework to get him snacks and sends her out at night in New York because he's too lazy to get up off his fat ass and get them himself, then promptly goes to watch tv and falls asleep and doesn't even realize until the next day (!!) that his daughter is missing, when it turns out she's been kidnapped, raped and murdered. Women and girls are unfortunately raped all the time (and that includes in small towns).

This goes beyond just bad and/or negligent parenting, I hold him indirectly responsible!



Wise guys back!

Wise guys back!

:)

I have a huge problem with someone who pries their daughter away from doing their homework to get him snacks and sends her out at night in New York because he's too lazy to get up off his fat ass and get them himself, then promptly goes to watch tv and falls asleep and doesn't even realize until the next day (!!) that his daughter is missing, when it turns out she's been kidnapped, raped and murdered. Women and girls are unfortunately raped all the time (and that includes in small towns).

This goes beyond just bad and/or negligent parenting, I hold him indirectly responsible!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRG2N-s3bg58vNd3ZO7drJdmzM1Qg_Xp39Ak6I3AS074pNk1tgg

Donald Kemp and Wanda Mays were murdered.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRG2N-s3bg58vNd3ZO7drJdmzM1Qg_Xp39Ak6I3AS074pNk1tgg

Indeed. And I'll add this...

http://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/head+slam+into+wall.+its+pretty+much+in+the+title_fb940a_3773160.gif

I'm in the extreme minority who believe Tim McClure killed his mother. Extreme minority.

sends her out at night in New York

You do realize that all of New York is not New York City, right? This case took place about an hour from me, and being out at night, even now, is far from a death sentence. I couldn't tell you the amount of times I was out as a kid (around that time) until after dark, and I never got murdered/raped/abducted. Neither did any of my friends, regardless of sex. Or anyone else we knew. It's really quite common around here, because while we have "cities" around here, people outside of this area will not consider them "cities." And crimes of that type are far from normal here.

Kristi Gunderson Lee and Ted Loseff are the most criminally underrated cases that do not get nearly the amount of discussion that other cases get.

You do realize that all of New York is not New York City, right? This case took place about an hour from me, and being out at night, even now, is far from a death sentence. I couldn't tell you the amount of times I was out as a kid (around that time) until after dark, and I never got murdered/raped/abducted. Neither did any of my friends, regardless of sex. Or anyone else we knew. It's really quite common around here, because while we have "cities" around here, people outside of this area will not consider them "cities." And crimes of that type are far from normal here.

Yes. I'm not a woman and have never been to New York, but I would imagine a lot of women, especially girls, would be apprehensive about being out alone at night, regardless of the city. Creeps can and do exist anywhere. For that matter, we don't know how Kari Lynn felt about going out that night. It was an order given to her.

For the geographically challenged, here (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/New+York+City,+NY/Au+Sable+Forks,+NY+12912/@42.5841255,-75.5642832,7z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c24fa5d33f083b:0xc80b8f06e177fe62!2m2!1d-74.0059728!2d40.7127753!1m5!1m1!1s0x4cca5611f33bb861:0x41caed4ad3ef25f4!2m2!1d-73.6745834!2d44.441714) you go.

I'm not a woman...

Debatable.

...and have never been to New York.

Big shocker there. 🙄

Yes. I'm not a woman and have never been to New York, but I would imagine a lot of women, especially girls, would be apprehensive about being out alone at night, regardless of the city.

Define "city." Ausable Forks (where this happened) has about 600 people. And it's quite obvious you haven't been to New York. Yes, there are some women/girls who may be apprehensive. But I can tell you from experience that the majority are not. The majority of this area is farmland and woodland. Yes, creeps and criminals exist everywhere, but when you get to a place like this, there are far fewer, based simply off the fact that you have far fewer people in the general population.

From someone who lives in New York State (you know, the huge state that is attached to the cesspool known as New York City), quit lumping the rest of the state in as a pit of murder and rape. Yes, it happens. But to act as though it's a daily occurrence that makes us all scared to leave our house when the sun goes down is almost an insult.

Debatable.



Big shocker there. 🙄

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

...the cesspool known as New York City.

Hey now! 😢

Hey now! 😢

Aww. I didn't mean anything by it. :hug:

I just get REALLY sick of people who have never set foot in this state thinking that the entire state is New York City.

Don't even get me started on "Upstate New York." :lol: :lol: :lol:

I believe that victims and relatives of victims should almost always be held in the highest possible regard. They often know things that we do not know.

I have a huge problem with someone who pries their daughter away from doing their homework to get him snacks and sends her out at night in New York because he's too lazy to get up off his fat ass and get them himself, then promptly goes to watch tv and falls asleep and doesn't even realize until the next day (!!) that his daughter is missing, when it turns out she's been kidnapped, raped and murdered.

----------

I believe that victims and relatives of victims should almost always be held in the highest possible regard. They often know things that we do not know.

Does not compute.

So you feel they should be held in the highest possible regard because they know things we don't, but you also talk about how the relative of one victim was "too lazy to get up off his fat ass" and "doesn't even realize until the next day his daughter is missing."

Did you think that perhaps he knew things you don't, and that's why he had no problem with his daughter going down the street to the store? Maybe because he knows the area? And because his daughter knew the area? And maybe because it was something she'd done a lot, on previous occasions, with no issues? As almost all of us in areas like this have done, at times at an even younger age than 16?

That being said, have you given any thought to how he felt after? Having asked his child to do something so mundane, only to have her get raped and murdered because of it? Would that not count in the holding of victims and their families in the highest regard?