Hi Everyone,
I'am wondering if there's anything more about Edward Harold Bell then an update like newspapaper clippings or something, he's the man who killed Larry Dickens in 1978 when he was visiting his family in Texas. Please help if anyone knows how I can get some articles on him.

thanks, Erin

Hmmm... earlier today, I was watching "Unsolved Mysteries" and that segment reaired. If I remember correctly, Bell had been arrested some time ago, according to an update added on that segment.

-Makoto_4

Originally posted by Makoto_4
Hmmm... earlier today, I was watching "Unsolved Mysteries" and that segment reaired. If I remember correctly, Bell had been arrested some time ago, according to an update added on that segment.

-Makoto_4

You are remembering it correctly, Makoto. And as mentioned in the update, Bell went on trial for Larry's murder in 1993, found guilty, and sentenced to 70 years in prison.

Knowing that he was in his 50s at the time of his arrest, he'll be in his 120s before he gets released. And his chances of living out that 70-year sentence are extremely slim to none. Obviously, the only way he'll get out of jail is in a box.

By the way, did you notice that, in the UM segment, Larry Dickens was portrayed by Matthew McConaughey?

Okay, I know I'm adding to an old post, but the segment aired today and did anyone else notice the "way over the top overacting" that the woman who chased Edward Bell out of her house did when she was reading the newspaper and saw the picture of Edward Bell? Classic! now we know why Matthew went on to become Mr. Penelope Cruz and she is.... where.....

Okay, I know I'm adding to an old post, but the segment aired today and did anyone else notice the "way over the top overacting" that the woman who chased Edward Bell out of her house did when she was reading the newspaper and saw the picture of Edward Bell? Classic! now we know why Matthew went on to become Mr. Penelope Cruz and she is.... where.....

LOL! Actually that woman is not an actress. She was a production crew worker on the Unsolved Mysteries set. They just decided to use her.

The commentary on the DVD segment (Bizarre murders) mentioned that. Call her an overactor if you want, but that looks like one woman I wouldn't want to mess with. ;)

LOL! Actually that woman is not an actress. She was a production crew worker on the Unsolved Mysteries set. They just decided to use her.

The commentary on the DVD segment (Bizarre murders) mentioned that. Call her an overactor if you want, but that looks like one woman I wouldn't want to mess with. ;)

In that commentary do they mention anything about McConaughey?

they mention this segment as his first national tv exposure...
in the light of things i would not say that she over acted, because after all she was driving a man with a knife out of her house!

....in the light of things i would not say that she over acted, because after all she was driving a man with a knife out of her house!

That's not the scene I was talking about. I'm talking about the scene where she's reading the newspaper and runs across the article mentioning Edward Bell. It looked like she bit into a rancid pickle the way she shook her head. Look any woman who has a gun in her house and chases a guy out of said house can overact all she wants. It was a funny scene.

I'm calling Matthew McConaughey Mr. Penelope Cruz, since they have been an item since filming Sahara. It beats calling them Penelothew or Matthewolope. Salma Hayek is smoking hot, but she hasn't made any good movies. I can't think of one movie she was in that I liked. Now why she keeps picking terrible movies to make is an Unsolved Mystery!

Sorry, I made a mistake. When I saw this face. ;) I thought you were being sarcastic. I'll delete the message. :( Salma was great in Desperado.

Does she get nekkid n Desperado?

LOL! Actually that woman is not an actress. She was a production crew worker on the Unsolved Mysteries set. They just decided to use her.

The commentary on the DVD segment (Bizarre murders) mentioned that. Call her an overactor if you want, but that looks like one woman I wouldn't want to mess with. ;)

For someone who wasn't a professional actress, she acted her butt off.

Yes she did, though we don't see any body parts. It was a love scene with Selma and Antonio Banderas.

I wonder why this guy didn't get the death penalty. There is no doubt at all that he killed Larry Dickens.

Bell didnt get the death penalty because under Texas law not all murders are death penalty eligible. Bell was charged with "murder" which in Texas is the equivelant to what 2nd degree murder would be in most states. If a murder is death penalty eligible in Texas it is called "capital murder". Especially up until the middle 1990's it was very restrictive on what murders were death penalty eligible in Texas. Up until that time, for a crime to be death penalty eligible it usually had to be a murder that happened in the commission of another felony such as armed robbery, rape, etc. In the mid 90's, the statue was expanded some to include murders of children and elderly people and things of that nature. However Bell was charged with "murder" and he was convicted and was sentenced to 70 years in prison. He is eligible for parole in 2013 and his mandatory release date is 2023.

So the scumbag could conceivably get out of prison while he's in his 80s? That's if he lives for another 15 years. Are you sure they are going to let him out for only 30 years for killing a man in cold blood in front of his family?

Well the state doesnt have a choice in this matter. If Bell is still alive when his mandatory release comes he will be released. In Texas, for crimes committed on or before August 31st, 1996 there was mandatory release if it was a non life sentence. He becomes parole eligible in 2013 and the state can deny him parole at those hearings but his release date in 2023 is mandatory so if he isnt paroled before that time he will be released in 2023 when he will be I believe 83 years old. But it isnt like the state is releasing him because they want him out, that is just how the laws were in Texas at that time.

Damn. This son of a bitch needs to remain behind bars for the rest of his life at least.

Salma Hayek is smoking hot, but she hasn't made any good movies. I can't think of one movie she was in that I liked. Now why she keeps picking terrible movies to make is an Unsolved Mystery!
Once Upon a Time in Mexico (2003), The Faculty (1998) and From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

Dogma, Traffic, Across the Universe

Police Have “Person of Interest” in ’71 Double Murder

Published in 2006

Breck Porter/The Police News

(GALVESTON, TX) -- A Galveston Police Detective says that he is investigating a man currently in prison on a murder charge in connection with the 1971 abduction and murders of Maria Johnson and Debbie Ackerman, both 15. The two Ball High School students disappeared from Galveston Mall on November 15, 1971 and were later found floating in Turner’s Bayou in Texas City. Their hands and feet were bound and they were partially clad. Both had been killed by a gunshot in the head.

The person of interest is 67-year old Edward Harold Bell, now serving a 70-year prison sentence in the Jester Prison Unit at Richmond, Texas.

According to Detective Fred Paige, Bell’s trip to the penitentiary began on August 24, 1978 in Pasadena. As four children were playing near an intersection on Oak Street, Bell, driving a red and white GMC pickup truck, stopped at the intersection, got out of the truck, and approached the children nude from his waist down. He was 45 at the time. The children included two girls 10-14 years old.

Across the street, neighbor Dorothy Lang, had been watching the children play and saw Bell as he got out of the pickup and walked towards the children exposing himself. Lang called to her son, Larry Gibbins, who was mowing the grass. Upon hearing his mother, 27-year old Gibbins told his mother to call the police and he ran to confront Bell. The two men met at the door of Bell’s truck at the same time and Gibbins succeeded in grabbing the keys from the ignition. He planned to hold Bell at bay until police arrived, but Bell retrieved a .22 caliber pistol from the truck and started firing at Gibbins. As Gibbins tried to flee, Bell continued shooting, hitting Gibbins five times before he fell.

Lang watched as her son was gunned down in the street and with the line still open on her cell phone, ran to the aid of Gibbins. She got between Bell and Gibbins yelling at Bell, “Leave, the police are coming, the police are coming!” Bell replied that he could not leave because Gibbins had the keys to his truck. In desperation, Lang retrieved the keys from her son, lying motionless on the ground, and threw them to Bell. The shooter went to his truck, pulled out an M-1 Carbine rifle, returned to where Gibbins was lying and fired one shot between his eyes killing him. He was arrested later by Pasadena Motorcycle Officers after he crashed his truck into a house.

Following his arrest, Bell posted $150,000 bail bond and disappeared. He was later discovered living in Panama and was extradited back to Texas where he was convicted of murder and four counts of Indecency With A Child for which he received an additional 10-year sentence.

Bell was living in Dayton, Texas, but had a business in Galveston, a surf and dive shop at 5700 Avenue S. He was also running supply boats to offshore oil rigs and was considered an astute businessman.

Early on in the business, Bell spent little time in the shop, his partner doing most of the work. The partner soon became disenchanted with the way the partnership was working out and left the business, forcing Bell to devote most of his time and attention there.

Detective Paige says that during that period in 1971, Debbie Ackerman and Maria Johnson frequented Doug’s Surf & Dive Shop on Avenue S, and were seen there just prior to their disappearance. “We’re investigating linkage between the two dead girls and other girls murdered during this time from in Galveston County,” said Paige.

There is also a white van involved in the investigation. Paige told The Police News, “For whatever reason back then they were putting so much emphasis on a green truck as a suspect vehicle. They were always talking about a green truck. Apparently there was a pedophile running around in a green truck in the same time frame and the news picked up on that green truck. I believe that if they had put a white van in the paper they would have got his ass,” said the detective.

The last time Ackerman and Johnson were seen alive, they were willingly getting into a white van across the street from the Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream Shoppe on 4th Street. Edward Howard Bell, who the girls probably knew from the surf shop, had previously been arrested while driving a white van.

“We’ve got some circumstantial evidence,” says Detective Paige. “We can link him. When we look at all these other cases involving young girls in the Galveston County area, I can make a good argument and put our guy in the area. I’m talking about Alvin, Dickinson, Galveston, Southwest Houston and Pasadena. This guy could be could be one of those guys we read about,” he concluded.

Paige appealed to anyone who may have snapped pictures of Doug’s Surf & Dive Shop at 5700 Avenue S, between 1971-73, to contact him, especially if the picture reveals a white van parked there.

We encourage our readers who may remember the surf shop or may have gone there in the old days, 35 years ago, or who may be in possession of some old, inherited photographs, or who may have known or met Edward Howard Bell, to also contact Paige. It is never too late to prosecute for murder.

The direct phone line to the desk of Detective Paige is 409-797-3762.

Breck Porter is the editor of the Galveston County Police News
409-762-NEWS (6397)

Parts of that article have got to be wrong. They say that Larry's mother left the line with the emergency operator open on her CELL PHONE. This happened in 1978. No cell phones back then.

I get so mad when murderers are let out on bond. This guy was a well to do businessman and had plenty of money to put up the bond to get out of jail and leave the country before his murder trial.

IMO, his willingness to parade naked in front of kids and empty his gun into an innocent man in front of his family, go back and get another gun to finish the guy off, then lead the police on a wild chase, and attempt to shoot at them proves the guy is a flight risk.

On another topic, this segment has got to be one of the worst for slathering on that spike tv style, loud, distracting, video game quality rock music. Yuck.

Oh, and don't forget, if he's still alive and kickin, Bell will be up for parole in 4 years. :eek:

Damn. This son of a bitch needs to remain behind bars for the rest of his life at least.
At least? Should they keep him there after he's dead?

At least? Should they keep him there after he's dead?

If they do, I hope they consider the option of solitary confinement. ewwww..

The article also refers to "Larry Gibbins". I thought his name was Larry Dickens.

The article also refers to "Larry Gibbins". I thought his name was Larry Dickens.

You're right. I totally missed that mistake. His name is Larry Dickens.

I wonder what the heck is going on with that article.

Tracy it is a thing called the constitution that guarantees the right to bail because our country was founded on the principal of innocent until proven guilty. Of course certain states have passed laws that do not allow people to post bond for certain charges, in Texas I know they can hold you without bail on a capital murder charge but even a 'regular' murder charge they have to set bail. Again hate to play devils advocate but it is sorely needed, innocent until proven guilty folks. Also, Bell did not post bail right away in fact he sat in the county jail for over two months before he posted bond. This is most likely because at first his bail was set too high for him to post it but after a while in jail his bond was reduced. Even if this occurred in modern times, Bell would still have been able to post bond. In Texas it seems that 'murder' is the equivalent to 2nd degree murder in most states. You can get anywhere from probation to 99 years in prison so the sentencing is very open ended. 1st degree murder which is a narrow statute in Texas is where if convicted you get a mandatory life sentence but the crime is not death penalty eligible. Capital murder is where you can get either the death penalty or life in prison. If that occurred these days they could put an ankle bracelet on him and monitor him. Yes of course he could still escape but it would not be as easy in 78 where he could just get in his car or get on a plane and get across the border an it would be many hours, maybe even days before anyone would realize he was missing. Ironically, it is because Bell jumped bail that he is still in prison. Had he stuck around and went to prison in 79 or so he would have been released from prison this year if he had not been paroled already! In murder cases in Texas, juries sentence people not the judge, the judge formally gives the sentence but it is a sentence the jury determined. Bell was sentenced to 70 years which is on the higher end of sentencing for murder cases in Texas. However under 1978 law (in fact until the law was changed in 1996) all non life or death sentence cases had what was called 'mandatory supervision'. In Bell's case that would mean it is mandatory that he be released after serving 30 years of his 70 year sentence. He becomes parole eligible after serving 20 years although I say the chances are nil that he will be paroled the first time. I think it is all but certain the Texas parole board will turn him at least once and probably more. In Bell's case he will get a parole hearing every two years unless he is kept until his mandatory release date in 2023 when he will be 83 years old. He will be in his mid 70's before he even has a realistic chance of getting out.

Then again though, the Texas parole board did parole Kenneth McDuff, a convicted triple murderer as we all know so I suppose anything is possible. McDuff of course was on death row for 5 years but his sentence was commuted to life in 1972 along with all other death sentences in the nation when the death penalty was ruled unconstitutional (as it should have stayed), this decision was reversed in 1976 when the death penalty was ruled constitutional again but the sentences that had been commuted could not be reinstated. When the sentences were commuted across the country, all of the sentences for each person were ran concurrent to one another so McDuff was serving 3 life sentences at the same time. At that time in Texas, a person became eligible for parole after serving 15 years of a life sentence. McDuff was parole eligible in 1981 and was denied parole at least 3 times before he was granted parole in 1989. The Texas parole board does release lifers from murder sentences sometimes but it is not common, a few years ago, a cop killer was paroled from a life sentence which is practically unheard of Texas, I believe he had served 28 years of a life sentence for murdering a Texas ranger when he was paroled.

Kadrmas, you know that I know about innocent until proven guilty...

BTW, I'm basing all my opinions on the UM segment, I haven't studied this case at all.

If the case really is as it's portrayed, I'm glad Bell had to sit in jail a while waiting to get bailed out. I still stand by my opinion on this one.

Because of the circumstances involved, including the sexual advances on the kids, the particularly heinous nature of the murder, plus eluding police and shooting at them, I think it was obvious that he was going to be a flight risk. He was a flight risk the day it happened, fleeing the police at the scene.

I don't know a darn thing about law, so I guess if he's supposed to have a bail set for him, then make it so high that he can't afford it and neither can his bail bondsman.

Now, in a different kind of murder or killing, I can understand the reason for the bail system. Maybe the case against the accused isn't blatantly obvious as this cold blooded daylight murder in front of the victim's family.

Maybe in a case of a bar room fight that went too far, some drunk person lost control, and in anger, stabbed someone to death... their situation would be different. That person isn't such an enormous danger to society. That person isn't a predator. They are certainly entitled to have a decent bail set and let the system do its thing.

But not for Bell. He flaunted our justice system at us and used it against us to victimize society again. And who knows how many raped and dead people he left in his wake while he was on the run in panama and god knows where else...

In Texas it seems that 'murder' is the equivalent to 2nd degree murder in most states. You can get anywhere from probation to 99 years in prison so the sentencing is very open ended. 1st degree murder which is a narrow statute in Texas is where if convicted you get a mandatory life sentence but the crime is not death penalty eligible. Capital murder is where you can get either the death penalty or life in prison.
That's almost right. Texas has capital murder and murder. We don't have 1st degree, 2nd degree, etc., like other states. Sometimes, the media will say someone in Texas was convicted of "first degree murder," but that is really them misstating it based on the fact that murder is a first degree felony. Like all other first degree felonies in Texas, the punishment range for murder is probation (if you have no prior felonies) or 5-99 years or life in prison. The punishment for capital murder, however, is death or life without parole (LWOP is relatively recent in the last few years--the choices for capital murder used to be death or life with parole). Texas does not have a classic voluntary manslaughter charge like other states. Instead, if you are convicted of murder, you can try to establish during the sentencing phase that you acted under sudden passion (the burden is on the defendant to prove this by a preponderance of the evidence), and, if you succeed, your sentencing range drops down from 1st degree felony punishment to 2nd degree felony punishment, which means probation or 2-20 years in prison. Now, as for release, the laws have changed since the old "mandatory release" days. If you are convicted of murder, you are eligible for parole after you have served 1/2 of your sentence, not to exceed 30 years. So, if you are sentenced to 40 years, you are eligible for parole in 20. But, if you are sentenced to 60 years or more, no matter how much more, you are eligible for parole after 30 years. The only difference it makes whether you are sentenced to 60, 70, 80, etc., or life, is for how long you are on parole once you are released.
In murder cases in Texas, juries sentence people not the judge, the judge formally gives the sentence but it is a sentence the jury determined.
This is also partially right. In Texas, defendants have the right in every case--from misdemeanors up to first degree felonies like murder--to choose whether the jury or the judge will set their punishment. However, if you go to trial, and you want to get probation for certain violent felonies like murder, you can only get that from a jury--a judge is limited to the range of years.

Holy crap! yuppielawyer! Are you in the great state of texas?

You wouldn't happen to need an unemployed detroiter, former medical office manager, with fast typing skills, proficient in all microsoft busines applications, self taught in all medical billing, accounts receivable, and accounts payable, to be a gopher/cleaning crew/janitor/jill of all trades, in your office.... wouldya? :) Huh, wouldya? Wouldya?

Once I even stood my ground in a pretrial phone conference again BC/BS where they "accidentally" over paid us. Which means they paid us the proper amount under the contract at that time. But then they wanted ten grand of the money back, after we had performed the medical procedures. Conveniently, they had waited until the last 2 months before their window of opportunity closed, to bring up the suit. Some of these patient's files were already sent into the archives. I wanted to kick their butts so bad! lol

I guess I was so scary in the phone conference with those BC/BS officials and their lawyers, that I scared them off! lol

Of course, I had done my research, knew each patient personally, and had their files memorized. I knew which dates, times, and types of treatment off the top of my head, and they didn't know squat.

They never sued us to recoup their bogus "overpayment", even when bigger facilities were giving in and paying $200,000 just to get rid of BC/BS bugging them. But not me!

Wow Yuppie, thanks for clearing that up! Of course you are a Texas lawyer but yeah I only know some stuff about Texas law, you are a member of the bar! I have always found Texas law and its quirks interesting. Didnt Texas used to have a first degree murder statute for a very few 'types' of murder? I know Texas made a lot of changes to their laws back in the early to mid 90's but for some reason I keep thinking that there used to be a first degree murder statute in Texas where if you were convicted you could not get the death penalty but instead got an automatic life sentence? But if I ever actually get to law school, one state that I would love to practice in is Texas.

Yes, Texas I believe was the most recent state to pass LWOP as you mentioned Yuppie. I want to say it was in 2005 that the Texas legislature abolished life with the possibility of parole and replaced it with LWOP and since then death sentences in Texas have decreased. This has caused some controversy because in Harris County last year a cop killer got LWOP instead of the death sentence, which was shocking to a lot of people, in fact most of those jurors voted for life, there were two that wanted death, the rest wanted LWOP. Last year was the first year in nearly 30 years I believe where Harris County did not return a death sentence.

Didnt Texas used to have a first degree murder statute for a very few 'types' of murder? I know Texas made a lot of changes to their laws back in the early to mid 90's but for some reason I keep thinking that there used to be a first degree murder statute in Texas where if you were convicted you could not get the death penalty but instead got an automatic life sentence?
I'm not aware of such a thing, but I started practicing in '99, so there could be something from before then that I don't know about. You may be thinking of capital murder. Under the law, the only possible sentences for capital murder are death or life (used to be with parole, now, it's without). In many cases involving capital murder, though, the state does not even seek the death penalty. So, technically, once the person is convicted of capital, there is nothing but an automatic life sentence.

It was not a big surprise, actually, that the introduction of LWOP reduced the number of death sentences handed down. For years, legislators would propose an LWOP option, and the people who would most vocally oppose it would be prosecutors (especially former longtime Harris County DA Johnny Holmes), based on their belief that, if jurors had a LWOP option, they would return fewer death sentences. So, they were okay with people who committed capital murder getting out on parole down the line (which, btw, for a life sentence in a capital case, you had to serve 40, not 30, years to be eligible), as long as that meant they could get more people on death row. They needed to be able to scare jurors into believing that the murderer would get out in order to get the jurors to vote for death.

Also, in response to the earlier discussion about why this case was not death eligible, the earlier answer given is correct--it did not fall within Texas's capital murder statute. I'm not sure what the law was back then, but under today's statutes, murder is capital murder and therefore death-penalty-eligible if it is one of the following:
1. Murder of a cop or fireman performing his or her duties
2. Murder in the course of committing certain other crimes (robbery, kidnapping, sexual assault, burglary, etc.)
3. Murder for hire
4. Murder in the course of an escape
5. Murder while in prison of
a. a prison employee
b. anyone if it is for gang/organized crime related reasons
c. anyone if you are already serving a sentence for murder
d. anoyone if you are already serving a life or 99 year sentence
6. Murder of a child under 6
7. Murder of more than one person at a time or as part of the same criminal scheme (so, this would cover a mass murder or a serial and/or spree killer)
8. Murder of a judge in retaliation or on account of his or her judicial duties

Wow Yuppie, very interesting indeed. What makes me think that Bell's case was not death penalty eligible is because he killed Dickens because Dickens interfered while Bell was exposing himself to the neighborhood children, while that is a lewd act, I am sure at that time it was not considered sexual assault and maybe still is not? It just seems there was not an aggravating circumstance to elevate it to capital murder although even if it had, at that time I am sure bond was always set in capital murder cases although the bond would have been much higher for capital murder than for murder.

Well, prosecutors, especially Harris County being against the introduction of LWOP does not surprise me. Since 95 percent or more of cases end in a plea bargain anyway I am sure they felt not only with LWOP that less people would get sent to death row but also that less people would take plea deals that would get them a life with the possibility of parole sentence. Of course in Texas as you mentioned it was 40 years before parole eligibility anyway so a lot of these people were basically serving LWOP anyway. I know even in the early 90's it was 15 years for parole possibility, then in 93 or 94, somewhere in there it was changed to 35 years and then eventually it was changed to 40 and then in '05 it was changed so for capital murder you can only get death penalty or LWOP.

Harris County is notoriously corrupt in their judicial system, Harris and Dallas Counties are both up there. Harris though was the death penalty of Texas and the country really as Harris County has sent more people to death row than any county in the United States. Things are changing in Harris County but slowly. The republicans got pretty much swept out of there in the elections last year, the judges that were up for re-election, something like 20 republican judges in Harris County went down last year and their longtime republican sheriff lost re-election. In fact I believe that Sheriff's race was the first democrat countywide win in Harris County since 1976. The republicans kept the District Attorney's office by a narrow margin which was amazing considering Chuck Rosenthal and his scandals. I mean he was thought to be the next Attorney General of Texas and then his career imploded. He sent many innocent people to death row, who knows how many have already been killed?

What do you think of Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins? I like Watkins overall although I was disappointed earlier this year when he personally prosecuted a death penalty case. Watkins is up for re-election next year so I guess he felt the need to start acting 'tough' on crime by getting blood thirsty to please jurors. Like I said, overall I like Watkins he is by far better than any of the alternatives but at the same time he is a politician with future and higher ambitions.

I like Craig Watkins for the stance he has taken on ensuring that exculpatory evidence is not withheld and on investigating old cases for miscarriages of justice. I practiced in the Dallas criminal courts for 4 1/2 years. I certainly remember Craig from my time there--he actually worked in the Public Defender's Office I worked in, but had left to go into private defense work before I started there.

I am against the death penalty, so I am always disappointed when any DA chooses to seek it, but I also understand that it's Texas, and you can't be the elected DA without supporting the death penalty. I am at least pleased in that I think he is seeking it only in the most serious cases. That's what I didn't like about Harris County--they went for death in almost every capital murder case, and, oftend did so for unethical reasons, IMO. I am convinced that they only went for death in the first Andrea Yates case so they could get a death-qualified jury, which would be more likely to reject her insanity defense. I don't believe it was a coincidence that, when she was retried with death off the table (and, therefore, no death-qualified jury), she was found legally insane. The evidence was pretty much the same in both cases (except for the crap about the Law & Order episode that was false and that led to the reversal of her first conviction), but the result was quite different--the major difference, plain and simple, was that someone didn't have to say they could impose the death penalty to get on the jury. Death-qualified jurors tend to be more pro-state.

I don't want to hijack this thread...

But yuppielawyer, do you have any ideas why the psychiatrist, Park Dietz, would testify that an episode of Law and Order had recently run that depicted the very crime andrea yates had just committed, and that she had likely gotten her "fake" defense idea from that?

Do you think it was diliberate or an honest mistake? (but holy cow, what a mistake, especially when you think of how many times every side of the case makes you answer the same stupid questions over and over..)

Anyway, sorry to be a pest, but I've done such a bad job of following andrea yates case that I didn't even know she'd had a second trial until I just read your post. I thought the sentence she got came from her first trial and that the whole thing went smooth.

Well to be honest it would not matter whether or not the psychiatrist 'mistakenly' or intentionally said what he said. I know your question was directed at yuppie not at me but I am throwing in my opinion and we will see whether Yuppie concurs or dissents? Anyway, the reason Andrea Yates got a new trial was because it was ruled that the psychiatrist saying that Andrea Yates took the 'idea' to drown her children from a law and order episode when in fact no episode had ever aired, at least not before Andrea Yates arrest. So whether it was intentional or an honest mistake the psychiatrist made that is an error that is not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. That means that Andrea Yates got a new trial because the judges of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals felt that Andrea Yates verdict might very well have been different had the jurors been aware that the psychiatrist was either lying or mistaken and that if the jurors had either never heard that testimony or had they been aware that no such law and order episode existed that the chances were better than not that it would have caused them to go not guilty by reason of insanity instead of guilty of capital murder.

No it doesn't matter whether it was intentional or an honest mistake, since the end result was the same...

I just wonder what people think cuz it seems so weird to me.

I think it was an honest mistake. I don't think Park Dietz intentionally perjured himself. I think he was just confused. That said, the prosecutors did emphasize that issue in their closing argument, and pointed to it as strong evidence that she was not insane at the time of the killings. Now, if you read the appellate court opinion (it's not the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, but an intermediate appellate court), you get the sense that the judges thought the jurors just flat out got the decision wrong. They really emphasize her undisputed, extensive mental health history, and then say that the false testimony could not be considered harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. In my opinion, I think the appeals court thought the jury made the wrong decision and the false testimony gave them a "legal hook" to hang their reversal on. The good thing was that, because the first jury had rejected the death penalty, the state could not seek it the second time. As such, no death-qualified jury. I think that made a huge difference in the second trial. If that woman wasn't legally insane, then nobody is.

It has always been my belief that the Harris County DA only sought death in the Yates case because they wanted a death-qualified jury to decide guilty/not guilty by reason of insanity. In all my years, I have never, ever seen Harris County prosecutors NOT implore the jury to give the death penalty in closing arguments in a case where they have sought it. In Andrea Yates's case, they did not. They told the jury to do what they thought was right. To me, that meant that they never believed death was appropriate. They just wanted a death-qualified jury because those folks would be less likely to return an insanity verdict. Shameful, IMO.

Well this is Harris County we are talking about, their DA's office has long been shameful. Whether under John Holmes or Chuck Rosenthal or now Pat Lykos I believe her name is. Also thanks for clearing up the fact that it was the Texas Court of Appeals for whatever district Houston is in and not the CCA. I forgot that only death penalty cases in Texas go directly to the CCA that life inmates and everyone else besides death row would go to the court of appeals first. In my opinion, Russell Yates should have also been charged as he kept impregnating Andrea despite knowing she was seriously mentally ill and that every new child added more and more stress to her already fragile mind. Of course Russ was only all too happy to dump Andrea off not long after she was convicted and quickly re-marry.

this is the10th circuit court of appeals decision on Bell's appeal
http://www.10thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/htmlopinion.asp?OpinionId=1036

What a despicible man. That appeals summary says it all. With Texas being so happy to put people to death, why wasn't he one of them? Such a complete and total massacre of Larry Dickens. Yeah, he was walking back into the garage with his rifle, for no apparant reason, and happened to trip and fall and shoot Larry directly in the head from six inches away. Uh huh.

Well, he was not executed because under Texas law, at least at that time and even now, only certain types of murder are eligible for a charge of Capital murder. Bell was not charged with capital murder because, well, he was not committing another felony while in the course of murdering Larry Dickens. Now, if this case had occurred now, it may be different but I think even under Texas law now, Bell would not have been charged with capital murder. Under Texas law, you can be charged with Capital Murder which carries either a life sentence (now you can only get life without parole or death) or 'murder' which seems to be open ended but is basically equal to 2nd degree murder in other states. In Texas, you can get anywhere from probation to up to 99 years in prison so the sentencing guidelines are very open ended. Juries, not judges sentence defendants both in murder and capital murder cases. So it was a jury sentence that he get 70 years. But yes, Bell's reasoning for why he did what he did was pretty pathetic. My guess is that Bell's lawyers tried to keep him off the stand, but they did not have much to work with to begin with. Bell claimed self defense, but the last I checked that was not self defense when you shoot a guy several times, he is still alive and then you go up to him and shoot him again in the head as he is lying on the ground. Had Bell not jumped bail and fled the country, he would be out of prison by now.

this is the10th circuit court of appeals decision on Bell's appeal
http://www.10thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/htmlopinion.asp?OpinionId=1036
Bell gave this rendition of what happened on August 24, 1978. As he was walking toward the corner and masturbating, he saw Larry running toward him. Bell attempted to return to his truck but arrived there at the same time as Larry. Larry then struck Bell on his left ear, and as he fell to the ground, Larry took the keys out of the vehicle's ignition. Bell heard Larry say, "Goddamn pervert," and, "You have to be punished for this." When Larry, who was still screaming at Bell, stepped to the back of the truck, Bell put on his pants.

Bell said he was "fearful" and had no path of retreat, so he pulled a pistol out of the truck, pointed it at Larry's head, and said, "Don't hit me again." When Bell asked for his keys, Larry doubled up his fist and struck him while Bell "kept snapping out shots" until Bell hit the ground. Bell got up off the ground, pulled a rifle out of his truck, and again demanded his keys. Bell stated that he did not point the rifle at Larry but followed him into his garage where Larry sat down. As he bent down to retrieve his keys, he tripped and the rifle discharged. Bell, who noted that he had not meant to kill the decedent, then fled, as Lang screamed at him.

Bell testified that when Larry hit him, he burst his eardrum, that he was in great pain, and that he was scared.
Don't you just love how his recollection of events make it sound like masturbating in front of a group of kids was a-okay, but when Larry came after him for it, Larry went overboard? Oh yeah, and he trips and accidentally fires numerous shots into Larry, then gets his precious keys so he can flee the scene, then gets another firearm and accidentally discharges that weapon into Larry again. :rolleyes: Too bad there isn't a penalty that can be given to this joker for wasting the court's time with this stupidity. I'm surprised he didn't sue the police department for chasing him when it was obviously his right as an American citizen to get away with accidentally killing someone just because he wanted to do a little public masturbating. :crazy:

Thanks for keeping my brothers memory alive. Its been 32 years since we buried him and we still miss him terribly. I would be happy to answer any questions anyone has about the murder as I was there and saw it all...it was much more gruesome and cold hearted than they could portray on TV by the way. Bell is up for parole soon...any info anyone has would be greatly appreciated.
Dawna

Thanks for keeping my brothers memory alive. Its been 32 years since we buried him and we still miss him terribly. I would be happy to answer any questions anyone has about the murder as I was there and saw it all...it was much more gruesome and cold hearted than they could portray on TV by the way. Bell is up for parole soon...any info anyone has would be greatly appreciated.
Dawna

Welcome to the board Dawna. So sorry about what happened to your brother. Here is a newsletter that states on the second page of the article about Bell that he will be up for parole in 2013 after serving 20 years of his 70 year sentence.

http://thepolicenews.net/html/gcpnjune06.pdf

This Bell character.... I'm not at all pleased to hear that he's up for parole in a couple years. Is this serial killer (yep, I think he's responsible for multiple murders and sexual crimes) still alive and kickin? How old is he now?

Will this be his first attempt at begging for early release? I wonder what he'll be telling the parole board in order to convince them that he's fit for society. Any educated (or even wild) guesses on what his chances really are of getting out at that time?

Has he been through any rehab type programs in prison? Has he ever admitted to his other crimes? Has he ever expressed remorse or even an actual understanding of the impact his violent and murderous acts have had on his victims and their families or has he always maintained that he's "the victim" as he stated in that link a few posts earlier in this thread?

In the link provided by CD, (post 47) it states that Bell spent time in the psychiatric unit of the prison (where no interviews are allowed) and was transfered to the medical unit. Prisoners there can be interviewed by the media, but Bell declined.

From what I can gather, he is about 73 years old now, which would make him about 76 at he upcoming meeting with the parole board. I sure hope they don't consider his "advanced age" as a reason for going ahead with releasing him. IMO, 76 is still plenty young enough to be a dangerous sexual criminal, not to mention, the age of the killer is no deterrent to committing a murder.

Thanks for keeping my brothers memory alive. Its been 32 years since we buried him and we still miss him terribly. I would be happy to answer any questions anyone has about the murder as I was there and saw it all...it was much more gruesome and cold hearted than they could portray on TV by the way. Bell is up for parole soon...any info anyone has would be greatly appreciated.

Hi Dawna. Thanks so much for posting on this board :) . My sincerest condolences for what happened to your brother as he seemed like a truly heroic and wonderful person. Rest assured that everyone here regards Edward Harold Bell to be one of the all-time worst scumbags on UM, but we think highly of your entire family. In fact, your mother's "I hope they throw the book at him!" after Bell was captured was one of those rare UM moments that made me want to cheer out loud!

Anyway, I'm curious about how much and you and your family were involved with the filming of the re-enactment. This segment is one of the more famous ones on the show because a young Matthew McConaughey portrayed your brother, so I'm wondering if you ever got the chance to meet him?

Dawna I'm also curious how accurate the UM reenactment was. Is there anything they imbellished or left out?

Bell is now 71 years old and 2013 will be his first parole attempt. My guess is he will get turned down at least the first time for parole. Under current Texas law, for crimes that occurred in the fall of 1996 or later, Bell would not have been eligible for mandatory supervision. But since Bell's crime occurred in 1978 he had to be tried under the laws in effect at that time and at that time in Texas if you were serving a non death sentence or non life sentence you were automatically eligible for mandatory supervision and it was/is not unusual for inmates sentenced under those laws to be released, typically after serving 40 percent of their sentence and that is if they are held for the maximum period of time.

For instance Bell is eligible for parole in 2013 after having served 20 years of a 70 year sentence and his mandatory release date will be in 2023 (if he is not granted parole before that time) after having served 30 years of a 70 year sentence. Under current law, Bell would have had to serve 30 years before even becoming eligible for parole and he could theoretically be forced to serve the full 70 years.

Bell is actually now in a medium security prison in Navasota, Texas, the Pack Unit. For Bell to get a transfer to that unit tells me he has been behaving himself lately. I do know a few years ago he was in the Estelle Unit prison in Huntsville which is a medical prison.

A Galveston Police Detective says that he is investigating a man currently in prison on a murder charge in connection with the 1971 abduction and murders of Maria Johnson and Debbie Ackerman, both 15. The two Ball High School students disappeared from Galveston Mall on November 15, 1971 and were later found floating in Turner’s Bayou in Texas City. Their hands and feet were bound and they were partially clad. Both had been killed by a gunshot in the head.

The person of interest is 67-year old Edward Harold Bell, now serving a 70-year prison sentence in the Jester Prison Unit at Richmond, Texas....


I could be really wrong, but aren't these the murders that Edward Self (who I believe has since died) was in prison for? Wasn't Self one of those Final Appeal segments on UM that was never "solved"?

http://books.google.com/books?id=ou8DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA47&lpg=PA47&dq=Larry+Dickens+murder&source=bl&ots=4Bmb3X7F_I&sig=4AWTuYvMsADG0JNJeQJFrBdu4Po&hl=en&ei=t2JFTfazCITPgAfYmK2jAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CF8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Larry%20Dickens%20murder&f=false

Weekly World News covered the story in 1985

This case was painful to watch, the acting was horrible.

New article about this guy. What a despicable scumbag, it's just a shame he's not in a country where he would be hung for this.





"He calls his victims the "Eleven that went to Heaven."

Edward Harold Bell, admitted sex offender, convicted murderer and self-described serial killer, has given multiple chilling confessions from his locked prison cell of abducting and slaying teenage and adolescent girls in the 1970s, describing crimes even now unsolved.

In disturbing letters sent to Harris and Galveston county prosecutors in 1998 — but kept secret for 13 years — Bell claimed to have killed seven girls, including two Galveston 15-year-olds shot as they stood tied up and half naked in the chilly waters of Turner Bayou, according to excerpts and descriptions of Bell's letters obtained by the Houston Chronicle.

In July and September, in exclusive interviews, Bell, now gaunt and pasty-faced at 72, told a Chronicle reporter the tally of lives was not just seven, but 11, the "Eleven that went to Heaven."

Bell claims a brainwashing "program" forced him to "be a flasher," to "rape girls" and ultimately to kill."

http://www.chron.com/news/article/SE-Texas-killer-says-he-murdered-11-teens-in-70s-2189209.php

I read some where that Ed Bell has since died. Can anyone verify this. I know he's in his early 70s but am wondering

I read some where that Ed Bell has since died. Can anyone verify this. I know he's in his early 70s but am wondering

Nope he's still alive, and he's back in the headlines with these new confessions to 11 different murders. He really needs to be put in front of a firing squad.

Nope he's still alive, and he's back in the headlines with these new confessions to 11 different murders. He really needs to be put in front of a firing squad.Disgusting...absolutly disgusting that this filth is still breathing ohno: well, here's to hoping that his reward finds him sooner rather than later.

Disgusting...absolutly disgusting that this filth is still breathing ohno: well, here's to hoping that his reward finds him sooner rather than later.

He's a pathetic and miserable old creature. His days are numbered.

They should try to convict him based on these new confessions and put him to death. Sorry but some people don't deserve to breathe the same air we do.

Yep...I used to be anti-death penalty, but there are some people in this world for whom I make an exception. Bell is certainly one of them.

Yep...I used to be anti-death penalty, but there are some people in this world for whom I make an exception. Bell is certainly one of them.
Spot on.

Okay, I am going to post an unpopular opinion here.....so go easy on me.

First I want to say that Edward Harold Bell is a murder and deserves whatever comes his way in terms of the traditional criminal justice system and/or prison justice. He killed a man.....period.

However, when this episode first aired it seemed that the guy who was killed had many opportunities to back off and perhaps not been shot. I am NOT blaming the victim in any way. Bell had a gun and yes he shot an unarmed man, but according to his mom (an eyewitness) he kept trying to confront Bell and be a hero and ended up getting shot!

Okay, I am going to post an unpopular opinion here.....so go easy on me.

First I want to say that Edward Harold Bell is a murder and deserves whatever comes his way in terms of the traditional criminal justice system and/or prison justice. He killed a man.....period.

However, when this episode first aired it seemed that the guy who was killed had many opportunities to back off and perhaps not been shot. I am NOT blaming the victim in any way. Bell had a gun and yes he shot an unarmed man, but according to his mom (an eyewitness) he kept trying to confront Bell and be a hero and ended up getting shot!

It probably will be unpopular, but I actually thought the same thing.

If the whole thing went down like the reinactment said, I felt Larry Dickens did act pretty foolish. The thing is, there is a time to be a hero, but there are some things I think should be left to law enforcement and a time to back off.

If you look at the situation, the children Larry was trying to save from Bell had ran off, so at that point no one was in immediate danger but him. He was unarmed and trying to detained an armed man, you just aren't going to win in that situation unless you can get the gun from him. But once he provoked Bell and drew him up near the house, what no one has mentioned is he also put his mother's life in danger as well. Bell could have kept shooting once he shot Larry.

Some people say Bell would have shot him anyway, but at that point I'd have to think Bell was just interested in getting out of there.

Ultimately it did no good, as Bell was caught anyway, although I suppose its possible Larry delaying him may have allowed him to be caught.

Still, I don't think Bell was worth this man's life. Once the children were out of danger he should have backed down, if not for the sake of his own life, for the sake of his mom's who Bell could easily have shot as well. In my opinion his mom being endangered alone made it the wrong decision.

One thing is for certain though, Bell wasn't thebest in the world at picking people to mess with. There was that woman who ran him off with a gun, Larry detaining him, and Larry's sister trying to get at him and beat the snot out of him........ he definitely picked some bad ones to screw with. :lol:

I guess Larry Dickens was the polar opposite of the guy in that episode who ran out of the house and to the police station when his girlfriend was being attacked by her ex husband. That was a situation I think where anyone who cared about her SHOULD have acted a hero, Larry was a hero when he probably shouldn't have been.

Still, I don't think Bell was worth this man's life. Once the children were out of danger he should have backed down, if not for the sake of his own life, for the sake of his mom's who Bell could easily have shot as well. In my opinion his mom being endangered alone made it the wrong decision.

I certainly agree that Larry died over a filth of a man and his mom and sister are probably feeling fortunate that they were not harmed.

No blaming the victim....but a few different choices could have resulted in a different outcome.

I certainly agree that Larry died over a filth of a man and his mom and sister are probably feeling fortunate that they were not harmed.

No blaming the victim....but a few different choices could have resulted in a different outcome.

From what I can remember Larry was a military guy, and he undoubtedly had a strong protective instinct. I can appreciate that, I think any man should protect his family at all costs.

But as I said, sometimes striving to be a hero can go to far. I think where you draw the line is when it ceases to be protection and becomes just a crusade to apprehend someone, which is what law enforcement is for. And in this instance it seems Larry's protective instincts actually and inadvertently put his own family in danger, not to mention himself.

Even so, his death was sad and tragic and my heart still goes out to all of them.

From what I can remember Larry was a military guy, and he undoubtedly had a strong protective instinct. I can appreciate that, I think any man should protect his family at all costs.

But as I said, sometimes striving to be a hero can go to far. I think where you draw the line is when it ceases to be protection and becomes just a crusade to apprehend someone, which is what law enforcement is for. And in this instance it seems Larry's protective instincts actually and inadvertently put his own family in danger, not to mention himself.

Even so, his death was sad and tragic and my heart still goes out to all of them.

I feel about this case kind of like the "49-er Hugs" one...I kept yelling at the tv - "Stop! Go back!" People ended up dead when there were many opportunites to change the outcome.

I am sure Larry thought he was doing the right thing - it is hard to not get involved when there is a man doing inappropriate things to little kids and you are a military man who wants to protect people. No doubt about that.

I feel about this case kind of like the "49-er Hugs" one...I kept yelling at the tv - "Stop! Go back!" People ended up dead when there were many opportunites to change the outcome.

I am sure Larry thought he was doing the right thing - it is hard to not get involved when there is a man doing inappropriate things to little kids and you are a military man who wants to protect people. No doubt about that.

In England, the cops are always reminding people not to become a 'have a go hero'. Perhaps there's an element of law enforcement territoriality to it, but cases such as this one demonstrate that attempting to apprehend a suspect yourself can have tragic consequences.

I've always thought that most people who produce a gun do so to gain a level of control within the situation and have no intention of actually using it. May be wrong, but Bell, scumbag that he is, clearly had no qualms about firing.

As someone who opposes the death penalty on principle, it would be a lie not to admit that cases like this really make the individual in that position question such a stance.

What became of "Sue" in this case? Not that I doubt her story, but wasn't the invasion in 1984? Wasn't it said that Bell had been in Panama for 10 years when he was arrested and brought back for the murder trial? Was "Sue" involved at all?

I was listening to this case again (my car CD player reads DVD audio for some reason, so I can listen to DVDs in my car... sometimes on a long trip I bring my UM DVDs along and listen to them like a radio show), and something struck me that hadn't before: the woman who thought she saw Bell in her home was probably wrong. I guess I came to the same conclusion as the previous poster on my own.

That siting took place in 1984; when the tip was phoned in about where Bell was, the person claimed he'd been living in Panama for 10 years. While this does not preclude the notion that he travelled back to Texas and decided to walk in on this woman one day, it makes a lot less likely I would think. Why risk getting caught/identified to travel back to the States to committ another not-for-profit crime?

Speaking of the woman who chased Bell out of her home in Bryan, did the episode ever mention which area?? I live in Bryan/College Station and am curious about the crime scene. Can't seem to find it online.

Sorry for bumping an old post!

Yep...I used to be anti-death penalty, but there are some people in this world for whom I make an exception. Bell is certainly one of them.

I think the UM segment on Bell should be shown to anti-death penalty supporters to see if it would change their minds.

Regarding the Edward Howard Bell case, someone must have E.S.P. on this board, as just this week I thought about how Larry Dickens could have acted differently when Bell was exposing himself to those children.

I agree, the murder of Larry was senseless and disturbing, and I in no way believe he deserved it, but I wondered why on earth didn't Larry just stay in the house, or if he wanted to try to catch him, discretely get Bell's license number off his truck. Short of Larry having a firearm himself (and even that might not have saved him if Bell was a better shot), he should have stayed out of it and waited for law enforcement.

This is the only segment of UM that really bothered me, just for the violence of it and the fact that Larry was shot at point-blank range (with the rifle), and the mother could do nothing to stop it. However, I sort of hope that Bell was the intruder at the other Texas home in 1984, as there is nothing more satisfying than seeing that lady beat him, have him run out, and then she tries to shoot him! Not once, but she runs out after him and shoots the truck. I imagine once that got out into the news, no intruder would be dumb enough to stop by that house!

I agree, the murder of Larry was senseless and disturbing, and I in no way believe he deserved it, but I wondered why on earth didn't Larry just stay in the house, or if he wanted to try to catch him, discretely get Bell's license number off his truck. Short of Larry having a firearm himself (and even that might not have saved him if Bell was a better shot), he should have stayed out of it and waited for law enforcement.



He was an army guy. No bull**** type of guy. When Bell exposed himself to children, Larry rightfully responded by chasing him away from the kids.

Edward Harold Bell is up for Parole this year...wonder how that will work out for him.

I agree, the murder of Larry was senseless and disturbing, and I in no way believe he deserved it, but I wondered why on earth didn't Larry just stay in the house, or if he wanted to try to catch him, discretely get Bell's license number off his truck.

Maybe because Larry had a small child himself, and he saw a man walking down towards a group of young girls masterbating without any pants on. He did the right thing and he died a hero, IMO.

Thought this was one of the worst acted segments, I cringe every time I come across it.

Maybe because Larry had a small child himself, and he saw a man walking down towards a group of young girls masterbating without any pants on. He did the right thing and he died a hero, IMO.

I agree with this. I have two small children and I'd have a hard time not doing something about it if I were to ever be put in that situation.

Thought this was one of the worst acted segments, I cringe every time I come across it.

Really? As far as UM segments go, I thought this was one of the better acted ones. In particular, the scene where the actress playing Dawna walked up to the squad car, started smacking the guy and crying.

I think the majority of Matthew McConaughey's movies are awful but even he wasn't that bad in this. His scream after being shot was kind of chilling.

Really? As far as UM segments go, I thought this was one of the better acted ones. In particular, the scene where the actress playing Dawna walked up to the squad car, started smacking the guy and crying.

I think the majority of Matthew McConaughey's movies are awful but even he wasn't that bad in this. His scream after being shot was kind of chilling.

Agreed. I remember the producers of UM saying that you knew the acting in a re-enactment was good if they just let a scene play out for a long period of time without any Robert Stack narration or interview sound bytes playing over it. Larry Dickens' murder is one of those scenes.

Agreed. I remember the producers of UM saying that you knew the acting in a re-enactment was good if they just let a scene play out for a long period of time without any Robert Stack narration or interview sound bytes playing over it. Larry Dickens' murder is one of those scenes.

Or in the case of the "New" Unsolved Mysteries, annoying rock music playing over it :lol:

Agreed. I remember the producers of UM saying that you knew the acting in a re-enactment was good if they just let a scene play out for a long period of time without any Robert Stack narration or interview sound bytes playing over it. Larry Dickens' murder is one of those scenes.

Indeed. And this wasn't a quick crime either. Everything that happened was drawn out in a torturous manner. It may be the most disturbing story reenacted in UM's history and I thought the actors did a pretty good job.

Even the reenactment with the break-in at the beginning of the segment wasn't that bad. Turns out that woman was on the UM production crew who was asked to act in that scene and I thought she was pretty convincing with her rage, chasing that guy out of her house.

That does not seem like the kind of woman you want to mess with. ;)

Indeed. And this wasn't a quick crime either. Everything that happened was drawn out in a torturous manner. It may be the most disturbing story reenacted in UM's history and I thought the actors did a pretty good job.

Even the reenactment with the break-in at the beginning of the segment wasn't that bad. Turns out that woman was on the UM production crew who was asked to act in that scene and I thought she was pretty convincing with her rage, chasing that guy out of her house.

That does not seem like the kind of woman you want to mess with. ;)

Indeed. Another notable thing worth mentioning is that Chuck Norris' son, Eric, does a pretty cool stunt in the segment as the policeman who crashes his motorcycle when Bell attempts to shoot at him.

After MM got famous, didn't they actually acknowledge him when they would show the reruns of this segment?

After MM got famous, didn't they actually acknowledge him when they would show the reruns of this segment?

Yeah i'm sure Farina did.

Indeed. Another notable thing worth mentioning is that Chuck Norris' son, Eric, does a pretty cool stunt in the segment as the policeman who crashes his motorcycle when Bell attempts to shoot at him.
That's awesome! I always thought that was a neat stunt.

OK, I'm digging up an oldie but I just had a question about the case.

Was it ever officially confirmed that Edward Bell was the one that invaded the woman's home and was he ever tried and convicted for that?

While Edward Bell is a horrible monster of a human being, and I believe he is fully capable of walking into a mother's home to do God knows what, I always felt like there was a possibility that it wasn't him and the would-be attacker just matched his description.

OK, I'm digging up an oldie but I just had a question about the case.

Was it ever officially confirmed that Edward Bell was the one that invaded the woman's home and was he ever tried and convicted for that?

While Edward Bell is a horrible monster of a human being, and I believe he is fully capable of walking into a mother's home to do God knows what, I always felt like there was a possibility that it wasn't him and the would-be attacker just matched his description.

I'm not sure if it was ever officially confirmed to be him, but I'm inclined to think the woman was mistaken about who she saw. By this point, Bell had liquidated his assets and successfully fled the country to start a new life, so I just don't see him taking such a huge risk by returning to Texas to break into some random woman's home.

I'm not sure if it was ever officially confirmed to be him, but I'm inclined to think the woman was mistaken about who she saw. By this point, Bell had liquidated his assets and successfully fled the country to start a new life, so I just don't see him taking such a huge risk by returning to Texas to break into some random woman's home.

I think mistaken identity is very likely, especially since she saw his picture in the paper months later.

My question would be: do we know when Bell left the US? The attack on "Sue" occurred in 1984; he was arrested in Panama in 1993.

I think mistaken identity is very likely, especially since she saw his picture in the paper months later.

My question would be: do we know when Bell left the US? The attack on "Sue" occurred in 1984; he was arrested in Panama in 1993.

My impression was that Bell would have immediately left the country after he was granted bail for Larry Dickens' murder in 1978. Considering that he had become one of the most wanted fugitives in Texas, I just don't see him returning there six years after the fact, particularly if he already had a new life established elsewhere under a new identity.

My impression was that Bell would have immediately left the country after he was granted bail for Larry Dickens' murder in 1978. Considering that he had become one of the most wanted fugitives in Texas, I just don't see him returning there six years after the fact, particularly if he already had a new life established elsewhere under a new identity.

I had forgotten he was granted bail. Christ that's messed up

Hopefully he finally get's charged with one of his other crimes before he is scheduled to be relased in 5 1/2 years.

Bell is dead.

Does anybody know what street in Pasadena the murder of Larry Dickens occurred on?

Does anybody know what street in Pasadena the murder of Larry Dickens occurred on?

The intersection of Oaks Drive & Handell Lane.

Bell is dead.


Merry Christmas, everybody.

one of the most senseless and vile crimes featured on UM. Also one of the scariest segments. Seeing a normal looking neighborhood on a bright sunny day, then some psycho arrives and starts exposing himself to kids and gunning people down. Scarier than any horror movie

I had forgotten he was granted bail. Christ that's messed up

This was one case where I was both shocked and disappointed in TX, they really dropped the ball.

A murder with 2 eyewitnesses, who then attempted to shoot a peace officer, and all of this after the dirt-bag was exposing himself. Not only should he not have gotten bail, he should have gotten the squad. :mad:

I get actual chills every time I look at his mugshot, along with Dennis Deluge’s portrait and the rest stop killer composite.

This was one case where I was both shocked and disappointed in TX, they really dropped the ball.

A murder with 2 eyewitnesses, who then attempted to shoot a peace officer, and all of this after the dirt-bag was exposing himself. Not only should he not have gotten bail, he should have gotten the squad. :mad:

absolutely! and yet again it happened with another UM segment from 1992, Colleen Reed who was murdered by Kenneth McDuff. McDuff was a convicted serial murderer who was released from prison in 1989. Criminal justice has been a difficult process over the years in the state of Texas. I wonder how many murders were perpetrated by Bell and McDuff and yet perpetuated by the state for not fully holding them accountable when they had the chance.

There are some documentaries out there regarding the Texas Killing Fields. The killing fields refer to multiple unsolved murders of women that occurred on or near the I-45 corridor including the areas of Pasadena/Houston/Galveston. I've read that Bell confessed to murders in that area, but I think the confession could not be fully substantiated. For him to be so bold as to do what he did in the Larry Hughes murder makes me believe that he committed many other violent crimes and lewd acts.

Maybe it was simply a sign of a different time? Take everything Bell did that day from 1978 and place it in 2023. Would he still have been granted bail? I hope not.

Maybe it was simply a sign of a different time? Take everything Bell did that day from 1978 and place it in 2023. Would he still have been granted bail? I hope not.
I would like to think the same.

How on earth was that guy granted bail? I cannot for the life of me imagine Texas of all places letting this happen. First off, he exposes himself to a bunch of kids (the UM segment seems to make it look like it was just boys that he did this too, not sure either way how it really happened). Then he kills Larry. He had no reason to shoot Larry. None. Larry did take his keys, but he had the gun, not Larry. Shooting him when he had no reason to was senseless. Then going back and getting the shotgun and shooting him again in cold blood was cowardly. Then he tries to shoot at a cop pursuing him. Then gets arrested.

Okay, so the guy is going to jail and is going to die behind bars right? Right? Nope. He is granted bail. Then escapes and the family doesn't have any peace until 14 years later when he is captured again. Why oh why was he given bail? It just makes no sense to me.

So when he was captured in 1993 he is sentenced to 70 years in prison. But was eligible for parole in 2013. It was denied and he died in 2019. But another question is why was he even eligible in 2013? What the heck happened to 70 years? And the supposed tough justice system in Texas?