Stuart Heaton request for new trial denied - Page 4 - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

kadrmas15 · 08-12-2007, 02:39 AM

Hmm, interesting, well, I will say if the state is so convinced of Stuart Heaton's guilt, why not give him a new trial? Since they are so confident, the results should be the same as the first.

Also, this stuff about Heaton, saying he didnt know the victim, I think this remark was mis interpreted, I think what he was saying, again this is my opinion, but what I feel what he was saying, when he said he didnt know her, was that he was saying he didnt know much about her, he never denied meeting her, he said he didnt know her, which in my mind tells me he didnt know much about her personally other than who she was, he said he didnt know her, he meant he didnt know much about her personally, people misinterpreted this and went off and running with it. The fact the victim was into drugs makes this case stink. Also, how do you not know there wasnt 100 white trucks in the county at the time of the murder?

Heaton was a carpenter, that isnt unusual for a carpenter to show up with cuts on his hands similar to Heaton's, also, the victim was stabbed over 80 times, which tells me it was a very personal killing, this was a killing of anger, rage and hate, there is no other way you could stab someone over 80 times like that, now why would Stuart Heaton murder a young woman in such a fashion? No one can answer that, because he didnt do it.

James T · 08-12-2007, 06:35 AM

Perhaps because they do not want to waste money on another trial for somebody whose story does not add up and when the chance of somebody else being responsible is 1 in 38 billion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadrmas15

Hmm, interesting, well, I will say if the state is so convinced of Stuart Heaton's guilt, why not give him a new trial? Since they are so confident, the results should be the same as the first.

Also, this stuff about Heaton, saying he didnt know the victim, I think this remark was mis interpreted, I think what he was saying, again this is my opinion, but what I feel what he was saying, when he said he didnt know her, was that he was saying he didnt know much about her, he never denied meeting her, he said he didnt know her, which in my mind tells me he didnt know much about her personally other than who she was, he said he didnt know her, he meant he didnt know much about her personally, people misinterpreted this and went off and running with it. The fact the victim was into drugs makes this case stink. Also, how do you not know there wasnt 100 white trucks in the county at the time of the murder?

Heaton was a carpenter, that isnt unusual for a carpenter to show up with cuts on his hands similar to Heaton's, also, the victim was stabbed over 80 times, which tells me it was a very personal killing, this was a killing of anger, rage and hate, there is no other way you could stab someone over 80 times like that, now why would Stuart Heaton murder a young woman in such a fashion? No one can answer that, because he didnt do it.

kadrmas15 · 08-12-2007, 10:10 AM

Well, I am backing off my claim of Heaton's innocence because I did go back and read, and I didnt realize that the new DNA test had those strong of odds against him, basically confirming there was no way it was anyone's DNA but his at the scene.

I honestly think the only way Heaton can claim innocence is if he can explain why his DNA was there. Could they tell if that semen came from a rape or from consensual sex? They did say it was old and crusty, the sample was.

Was the Court Tv show that Heaton was on, which one was it? Was it the investigators? There is another show called "The wrong man" that is on from time to time where two retired New York cops that are now private investigators look into cases and give their opinions.

However, one thing is for sure, there were problems in Heaton's arrest and trial, there is just no doubt about that, without that DNA evidence, Heaton would have been acquitted probably because they really had nothing else on him, except weak, circumstancial evidence. The prosecutor knew this, as cocky and smug as he was, and as typical as his response is, whenever there is any possiblity of wrong doing in a case, the prosecutors never admit to doing wrong, ever.

Clearly there were problems, if Heaton did it, than he is where he belongs, since Heaton was awarded that new DNA test, I am assuming that it was the defense team's lab that came back with those odds. It just makes me wonder why if Heaton was guilty, why would he request a new DNA test that would erase all doubt? I just dont get it. I do think the things about the truck, and the cuts on his hands, are very circumstancial and certainly not enough to convict someone of murder.

I just find it unusual how Heaton, if he did this murder, would murder Krystal Nabb in such a brutal manner, I mean to stab someone over 80 times with an unusual murder weapon in a pair of scissors? To stab someone that many times, first off there would be blood all over the person that was doing the stabbing, there is no way you could stab someone that many times and not get blood on you.

Also to stab someone that many times, it was overkill, big time, so that is a huge signal that the killing was very personal, the killer was very angry and hated Krystal Nabb, because it was such dramatic overkill, you can tell it was something personal.

James T · 08-12-2007, 10:29 AM

There is no way he can explain the DNA now because he says he did not know or barely knew the victim so how could he explain his semen being there without proving he was a liar?

kadrmas15 · 08-12-2007, 11:08 AM

Well again, I feel those comments were mis interpreted. I dont think he meant he literally didnt know her, I mean why would he even claim that? He was friends with her brother, so he obviously knew who she was, and everyone would know that he would know who she was, he might not have known her very well, as in known much about her, I think that his comment was taken out of context though, but again that is my opinion.

ObxBeachStar · 08-12-2007, 02:16 PM

the reason i said there werent 100 white trucks in the area was because we had been told that they were concentrating on ramsey and vandalia. which there wouldnt have been that many white trucks between the two towns. but this was all immediately after the murder. i do not know if they expanded their search to all of fayette county. in that case there probably were more than 100 white trucks.

and as i said before the reason he was not bloody was the cops did say that he took a shower at krystals after the murder. and with heaton arriving at home in a different set of clothes than there wouldnt have been any blood in his truck. and from what i have always been told semen only survives for 7 days. which is why they say after a rape go to the hospital immediately before the evidence is gone. which leads to the fact that the intercourse or rape occured within 7 days of the murder.

crystaldawn · 08-12-2007, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ObxBeachStar

the reason i said there werent 100 white trucks in the area was because we had been told that they were concentrating on ramsey and vandalia. which there wouldnt have been that many white trucks between the two towns. but this was all immediately after the murder. i do not know if they expanded their search to all of fayette county. in that case there probably were more than 100 white trucks.

and as i said before the reason he was not bloody was the cops did say that he took a shower at krystals after the murder. and with heaton arriving at home in a different set of clothes than there wouldnt have been any blood in his truck. and from what i have always been told semen only survives for 7 days. which is why they say after a rape go to the hospital immediately before the evidence is gone. which leads to the fact that the intercourse or rape occured within 7 days of the murder.

Thanks for posting btw. I was really on the fence about his guilt but the more I read the more I'm inclined to believe he may be guilty. Do you think the motive was drug related? Do you think Stuart and Krystal could have been having an affair? I do remember UM saying she was pregnant. Do you know if they were able to do a dna test on the baby and see if by chance it belonged to Stuart. Considering Stuart was married and his wife was pregnant at the time of the murder that could definitely be a motive for murder if that was the case. Anything else you can think of tell us that UM didn't mention, I'd really like to hear.

ObxBeachStar · 08-15-2007, 11:45 AM

well keep in my mind i was only 10 when this happened. in my earlier post i said nine. until i seen what the date was lol. it was a long time ago and i didn't remember what date it happened. just that i was out of school so it was sometime that summer. i'll start from the beginning. two years before she babysat me and my cousin while her older sister babysat my brother and my cousins brother. she took us into ramsey and played pool with some other teens while we had to sit there quietly. then she said she needed to go to vandalia which is 12 miles away and started hitchhiking with us. we got a ride from some man and he drove us to a house. she went in for a few minutes and then came back out and the guy drove us back to ramsey. she mentioned the word drugs and flirted with the guy a little bit and then she took us back to her place where her older sister was watching my brother and cousin. i told my parents what happened and she wasnt allowed to babysit us again. two years later we were driving the back way into vandalia which takes us right past krystals house and there were police outside. my father pulled over and talked to one of the cops. they said that her sister and her mother were going into town and had invited krystal along but she chose not to go. and that she had been murdered and that whoever had done it must have known that she would be alone for awhile because he took the time to take a shower after the murder. i looked toward the house and seen that the curtains in the front looked like they were shredded. when we got back home i overheard my parents telling my grandparents what had happened. not sure how much time went by but my parents later told me that they had caught the guy and that he was into drugs and that krystal was going to rat him out to the cops and he found out about it and killed her and that he had planned on killing two other girls from vandalia that were going to rat him out as well. my parents tried to shield me from what was going on but they wanted me to know the guy had been caught. i had refused to sleep with my bedroom door shut until they caught the guy because i was terrified that the killer was going to get me next. as i said i was a little girl at the time. i never knew she was pregnant until i seen it on um. my parents didnt tell me everything. i never even knew the guys name until um. as to why i think he's guilty is no more than logic. i know how dna works and the odds of someone else matching that same dna is highly unlikely. i also know that sperm dies within 7 days. so the encounter had to have been within the week of the murder. and the fact that he lied about knowing her. no one lies unless they have something to hide. the fact that he left wearing one set of clothes and came home in a different set. i have no idea whether they tested the babys dna. as i never knew about a baby before um. i hope that helps.

ClevelandTorsoFiend · 08-15-2007, 06:46 PM

TL/DR

Use paragraphs, damn.

Ban me if you must.

Oh yeah, Heaton is guilty. Just look at the shots the cops took of his sliced up hands. That is not carpentry knicks. Its scissor wounds.

crystaldawn · 08-15-2007, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandTorsoFiend

Ban me if you must.

That can definitely be arranged. Btw this isn't English class.

Thanks for posting that info ObxBeachStar. Not to speak ill of the dead but what a lousy babysitter...she actually hitchhiked with you guys?! Still a horrible fate that she didn't deserve.

ClevelandTorsoFiend · 08-15-2007, 10:45 PM

True, its not english class. Although it doesnt take much effort to sort your posts into paragraphs before, or even after they type it. It makes it much easier to read and the person posting that is probobly not even reading over what they said. Its just common curtiosy.

Also im just not going to take these people as credible if they wont even take the time to use paragraphs, its like how much effort did they put in getting what they say across? Its not even that easy to read when they do this and use run on sentances for like 10 lines.

kadrmas15 · 08-15-2007, 11:55 PM

Well, Crystaldawn is right, this is not English class, Torso finder, if you do not like it, you can always find another board to post at. By the way, we all know you think Heaton is guilty, since anyone with cuts on their hands is a murderer and should be thrown in prison we all know you are right. Since you claim that you cut your hand with a pair of scissors and that is matched Heaton's cuts, maybe you killed Crystal Knabb for all we know?

LooksLikeCRicci · 08-16-2007, 01:59 AM

And from the peanut gallery:

I've worked for lots of lawyers with REALLY REALLY crappy grammar. It doesn't make them less intelligent or credible as attorneys. Remember, this is an ONLINE message board, not an advanced thesis.

ObxBeachStar... what a story! As Crystaldawn's already said, thanks for posting. It's always interesting to hear from those who knew the victims/perps. And yeah... hitchhiking was never on the agenda when I was a babysitter. That's wild.

...and I'm also still on the damned fence in regards to Heaton. The DNA is pretty compelling....

ObxBeachStar · 08-16-2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandTorsoFiend

TL/DR

Use paragraphs, damn.

Ban me if you must.

Oh yeah, Heaton is guilty. Just look at the shots the cops took of his sliced up hands. That is not carpentry knicks. Its scissor wounds.

i'm sorry. i have a very high iq and i sometimes forget that i need to make it easier on the simple minded to read my writings.

i will be more considerate in the future. i hope this is easier for you to read.

and yes i do read over what i write.

and hitchiking with us was bad, but remember she was a young teenager at the time herself. and teenagers make a lot of errors as they are not mature enough to make wise decisions.

and no one deserves what happened to krystal.

genxergrrrl · 08-16-2007, 04:24 PM

Stuart Heaton is guilty. I personally know people involved with the appeals since '91. They were able to test the baby's DNA, my source couldn't directly say Stuart was the father, but let's just say it was implied. These court tv shows, unsolved mysteries, Connie Chung's show, they manipulate information. It's entertainment. They DON'T give you all the information. Heaton's wife stuck with him through most of the appeals, but after the last DNA results, even she accepted the truth. Heaton is a sociopath who has made bizarre threats on his own pro-bono attorneys. He was a Sunday school teacher with a family, and if news got out about his affair with an underage girl who was pregnant, it would shatter the image he had created for himself and this is why he lashed out so brutally...with the calmness of taking a shower in her home to wash off the blood when he was done! His own mother even said when she saw him that day, he was freshly showered and in different clothes than he was wearing that morning!!

08-12-2007, 02:16 PM	#51
ObxBeachStar Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Aug 11, 2007 Location: charleston, sc Posts: 7	the reason i said there werent 100 white trucks in the area was because we had been told that they were concentrating on ramsey and vandalia. which there wouldnt have been that many white trucks between the two towns. but this was all immediately after the murder. i do not know if they expanded their search to all of fayette county. in that case there probably were more than 100 white trucks. and as i said before the reason he was not bloody was the cops did say that he took a shower at krystals after the murder. and with heaton arriving at home in a different set of clothes than there wouldnt have been any blood in his truck. and from what i have always been told semen only survives for 7 days. which is why they say after a rape go to the hospital immediately before the evidence is gone. which leads to the fact that the intercourse or rape occured within 7 days of the murder.
	Last edited by ObxBeachStar; 08-12-2007 at 02:41 PM.

08-12-2007, 02:39 AM	#46
kadrmas15 Retired from Board 03/03/11 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 11, 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,910	Hmm, interesting, well, I will say if the state is so convinced of Stuart Heaton's guilt, why not give him a new trial? Since they are so confident, the results should be the same as the first. Also, this stuff about Heaton, saying he didnt know the victim, I think this remark was mis interpreted, I think what he was saying, again this is my opinion, but what I feel what he was saying, when he said he didnt know her, was that he was saying he didnt know much about her, he never denied meeting her, he said he didnt know her, which in my mind tells me he didnt know much about her personally other than who she was, he said he didnt know her, he meant he didnt know much about her personally, people misinterpreted this and went off and running with it. The fact the victim was into drugs makes this case stink. Also, how do you not know there wasnt 100 white trucks in the county at the time of the murder? Heaton was a carpenter, that isnt unusual for a carpenter to show up with cuts on his hands similar to Heaton's, also, the victim was stabbed over 80 times, which tells me it was a very personal killing, this was a killing of anger, rage and hate, there is no other way you could stab someone over 80 times like that, now why would Stuart Heaton murder a young woman in such a fashion? No one can answer that, because he didnt do it.

08-12-2007, 10:10 AM	#48
kadrmas15 Retired from Board 03/03/11 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 11, 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,910	Well, I am backing off my claim of Heaton's innocence because I did go back and read, and I didnt realize that the new DNA test had those strong of odds against him, basically confirming there was no way it was anyone's DNA but his at the scene. I honestly think the only way Heaton can claim innocence is if he can explain why his DNA was there. Could they tell if that semen came from a rape or from consensual sex? They did say it was old and crusty, the sample was. Was the Court Tv show that Heaton was on, which one was it? Was it the investigators? There is another show called "The wrong man" that is on from time to time where two retired New York cops that are now private investigators look into cases and give their opinions. However, one thing is for sure, there were problems in Heaton's arrest and trial, there is just no doubt about that, without that DNA evidence, Heaton would have been acquitted probably because they really had nothing else on him, except weak, circumstancial evidence. The prosecutor knew this, as cocky and smug as he was, and as typical as his response is, whenever there is any possiblity of wrong doing in a case, the prosecutors never admit to doing wrong, ever. Clearly there were problems, if Heaton did it, than he is where he belongs, since Heaton was awarded that new DNA test, I am assuming that it was the defense team's lab that came back with those odds. It just makes me wonder why if Heaton was guilty, why would he request a new DNA test that would erase all doubt? I just dont get it. I do think the things about the truck, and the cuts on his hands, are very circumstancial and certainly not enough to convict someone of murder. I just find it unusual how Heaton, if he did this murder, would murder Krystal Nabb in such a brutal manner, I mean to stab someone over 80 times with an unusual murder weapon in a pair of scissors? To stab someone that many times, first off there would be blood all over the person that was doing the stabbing, there is no way you could stab someone that many times and not get blood on you. Also to stab someone that many times, it was overkill, big time, so that is a huge signal that the killing was very personal, the killer was very angry and hated Krystal Nabb, because it was such dramatic overkill, you can tell it was something personal.

08-12-2007, 10:29 AM	#49
James T Member Senior Member Join Date: Apr 23, 2006 Location: England Posts: 1,563	There is no way he can explain the DNA now because he says he did not know or barely knew the victim so how could he explain his semen being there without proving he was a liar?

08-12-2007, 11:08 AM	#50
kadrmas15 Retired from Board 03/03/11 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 11, 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,910	Well again, I feel those comments were mis interpreted. I dont think he meant he literally didnt know her, I mean why would he even claim that? He was friends with her brother, so he obviously knew who she was, and everyone would know that he would know who she was, he might not have known her very well, as in known much about her, I think that his comment was taken out of context though, but again that is my opinion.

08-15-2007, 11:45 AM	#53
ObxBeachStar Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Aug 11, 2007 Location: charleston, sc Posts: 7	well keep in my mind i was only 10 when this happened. in my earlier post i said nine. until i seen what the date was lol. it was a long time ago and i didn't remember what date it happened. just that i was out of school so it was sometime that summer. i'll start from the beginning. two years before she babysat me and my cousin while her older sister babysat my brother and my cousins brother. she took us into ramsey and played pool with some other teens while we had to sit there quietly. then she said she needed to go to vandalia which is 12 miles away and started hitchhiking with us. we got a ride from some man and he drove us to a house. she went in for a few minutes and then came back out and the guy drove us back to ramsey. she mentioned the word drugs and flirted with the guy a little bit and then she took us back to her place where her older sister was watching my brother and cousin. i told my parents what happened and she wasnt allowed to babysit us again. two years later we were driving the back way into vandalia which takes us right past krystals house and there were police outside. my father pulled over and talked to one of the cops. they said that her sister and her mother were going into town and had invited krystal along but she chose not to go. and that she had been murdered and that whoever had done it must have known that she would be alone for awhile because he took the time to take a shower after the murder. i looked toward the house and seen that the curtains in the front looked like they were shredded. when we got back home i overheard my parents telling my grandparents what had happened. not sure how much time went by but my parents later told me that they had caught the guy and that he was into drugs and that krystal was going to rat him out to the cops and he found out about it and killed her and that he had planned on killing two other girls from vandalia that were going to rat him out as well. my parents tried to shield me from what was going on but they wanted me to know the guy had been caught. i had refused to sleep with my bedroom door shut until they caught the guy because i was terrified that the killer was going to get me next. as i said i was a little girl at the time. i never knew she was pregnant until i seen it on um. my parents didnt tell me everything. i never even knew the guys name until um. as to why i think he's guilty is no more than logic. i know how dna works and the odds of someone else matching that same dna is highly unlikely. i also know that sperm dies within 7 days. so the encounter had to have been within the week of the murder. and the fact that he lied about knowing her. no one lies unless they have something to hide. the fact that he left wearing one set of clothes and came home in a different set. i have no idea whether they tested the babys dna. as i never knew about a baby before um. i hope that helps.

08-15-2007, 06:46 PM	#54
ClevelandTorsoFiend Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Apr 11, 2006 Location: Midwest Posts: 30	TL/DR Use paragraphs, damn. Ban me if you must. Oh yeah, Heaton is guilty. Just look at the shots the cops took of his sliced up hands. That is not carpentry knicks. Its scissor wounds.

08-15-2007, 10:45 PM	#56
ClevelandTorsoFiend Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Apr 11, 2006 Location: Midwest Posts: 30	True, its not english class. Although it doesnt take much effort to sort your posts into paragraphs before, or even after they type it. It makes it much easier to read and the person posting that is probobly not even reading over what they said. Its just common curtiosy. Also im just not going to take these people as credible if they wont even take the time to use paragraphs, its like how much effort did they put in getting what they say across? Its not even that easy to read when they do this and use run on sentances for like 10 lines.

08-15-2007, 11:55 PM	#57
kadrmas15 Retired from Board 03/03/11 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 11, 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,910	Well, Crystaldawn is right, this is not English class, Torso finder, if you do not like it, you can always find another board to post at. By the way, we all know you think Heaton is guilty, since anyone with cuts on their hands is a murderer and should be thrown in prison we all know you are right. Since you claim that you cut your hand with a pair of scissors and that is matched Heaton's cuts, maybe you killed Crystal Knabb for all we know?

08-16-2007, 01:59 AM	#58
LooksLikeCRicci Likes to live in a clean house Moderator Forum 4000 Club Member Join Date: Nov 27, 2005 Posts: 4,050	And from the peanut gallery: I've worked for lots of lawyers with REALLY REALLY crappy grammar. It doesn't make them less intelligent or credible as attorneys. Remember, this is an ONLINE message board, not an advanced thesis. ObxBeachStar... what a story! As Crystaldawn's already said, thanks for posting. It's always interesting to hear from those who knew the victims/perps. And yeah... hitchhiking was never on the agenda when I was a babysitter. That's wild. ...and I'm also still on the damned fence in regards to Heaton. The DNA is pretty compelling....

08-16-2007, 04:24 PM	#60
genxergrrrl Member Forum Cub Join Date: Aug 16, 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 2	Stuart Heaton is guilty. I personally know people involved with the appeals since '91. They were able to test the baby's DNA, my source couldn't directly say Stuart was the father, but let's just say it was implied. These court tv shows, unsolved mysteries, Connie Chung's show, they manipulate information. It's entertainment. They DON'T give you all the information. Heaton's wife stuck with him through most of the appeals, but after the last DNA results, even she accepted the truth. Heaton is a sociopath who has made bizarre threats on his own pro-bono attorneys. He was a Sunday school teacher with a family, and if news got out about his affair with an underage girl who was pregnant, it would shatter the image he had created for himself and this is why he lashed out so brutally...with the calmness of taking a shower in her home to wash off the blood when he was done! His own mother even said when she saw him that day, he was freshly showered and in different clothes than he was wearing that morning!!