Why do you think Tim McClure's case was most likely dismissed with prejudice?

[yourhomiebrian]

The most interesting thing about the Tim McClure case was being dismissed with prejudice. Why do you think this case was most likely dismissed? What could they have possibly found out?

[Jon]

Please correct me if this is not true, but I don't think they recovered the gun that was used in the murder, or matched the bullet with a gun. I don't think there was a convincing motive either. There was no physical evidence linking him to the crime that I am aware of.

Mainly what makes him look guilty is his behavior. His behavior does make him look really guilty, but I just don't think it was enough

[justins5256]

I posted this elsewhere but...

I've had some correspondence with a former poster who lived near Reno at the time and claims he read a lot about the case in the local papers. He told me that McClure's arrest was the culmination of a long battle between the Carson City Sheriff's Department and the Carson City District Attorney's Office. The sheriff wanted to charge McClure, however, the DA wouldn't issue a warrant without more evidence. The sheriff finally arrested McClure on their own to force the DA's hand. The DA dismissed the case.

[LooksLikeCRicci]

Originally Posted by justins5256

I posted this elsewhere but...

I've had some correspondence with a former poster who lived near Reno at the time and claims he read a lot about the case in the local papers. He told me that McClure's arrest was the culmination of a long battle between the Carson City Sheriff's Department and the Carson City District Attorney's Office. The sheriff wanted to charge McClure, however, the DA wouldn't issue a warrant without more evidence. The sheriff finally arrested McClure on their own to force the DA's hand. The DA dismissed the case.

I remember you posted that! I remember chuckling over it then as I did just a second ago. I've had this same fight with law enforcement-- you want to make sure your ducks are all in a row. You only get one shot. Sometimes, it pays to play the waiting game.

(I bet if I find where you originally posted this, I said something similar. LOL.)

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

I remember you posted that! I remember chuckling over it then as I did just a second ago. I've had this same fight with law enforcement-- you want to make sure your ducks are all in a row. You only get one shot. Sometimes, it pays to play the waiting game.

(I bet if I find where you originally posted this, I said something similar. LOL.)

Heh. I actually posted that on the main McClure thread (McClure guilty as sin?). Just recopied and pasted here. Didn't notice if you responded back then or not. These discussions have a way of repeating themselves.

Would a situation like this, generally, lead to a dismissal "with prejudice?" Seems pretty severe. It seems like they would want to leave it open ended in the event more evidence surfaced.

I remember Stack said on the UM segment that the case was submitted to the DA once before and deemed insufficient to charge McClure. Maybe the fact that this was the second (known) time the case was brought led to the dismissal in this manner? Just a thought.

[LooksLikeCRicci]

Originally Posted by justins5256

Heh. I actually posted that on the main McClure thread (McClure guilty as sin?). Just recopied and pasted here. Didn't notice if you responded back then or not. These discussions have a way of repeating themselves.

Would a situation like this, generally, lead to a dismissal "with prejudice?" Seems pretty severe. It seems like they would want to leave it open ended in the event more evidence surfaced.

I remember Stack said on the UM segment that the case was submitted to the DA once before and deemed insufficient to charge McClure. Maybe the fact that this was the second (known) time the case was brought led to the dismissal in this manner? Just a thought.

I agree that it's a very severe dismissal. In my experience, cases are typically dismissed "without prejudice" when they are dismissed by the prosecution. It leaves the door open to re-file in the event, as you said, more evidence surfaces.

I would love to ask that judge what happened. He was either completely convinced of McClure's innocence... OR... what happened between the DA and police was so bad that the judiciary wanted to send a very strong message. I just can't see a judge letting someone get away with murder in a case like this, however. Teri McClure is one of the most sympathetic victims I've seen portrayed. I can't imagine anyone wanting her case to go unsolved.

[TheCars1986]

Because he didn't do it.

[yourhomiebrian]

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

I agree that it's a very severe dismissal. In my experience, cases are typically dismissed "without prejudice" when they are dismissed by the prosecution. It leaves the door open to re-file in the event, as you said, more evidence surfaces.

I would love to ask that judge what happened. He was either completely convinced of McClure's innocence... OR... what happened between the DA and police was so bad that the judiciary wanted to send a very strong message. I just can't see a judge letting someone get away with murder in a case like this, however. Teri McClure is one of the most sympathetic victims I've seen portrayed. I can't imagine anyone wanting her case to go unsolved.

Do you think there is likely that they caught someone tampering with evidence? Maybe planting something on Tim? That was the first thing I thought when I heard dismissed without prejudice. Maybe they caught someone trying to make McClure look guilty by tampering with evidence

[Todd Mueller]

Two things:

1) It's never been confirmed that it was "Dismissed with prejudice." There were a couple newspaper articles that mentioned this, but at least one said "Dismissed without prejudice." The problem is that we don't have the correct, or enough, information to draw anything official from this. The fact that he was ever charged tells me at some point someone felt they had a case against Tim. Perhaps it was only circumstantial, though.

2) It sounds as if Tim's ex-wife was going to testify for the prosecution but then changed her mind. That may be why the charges were dropped. It's very possible she was the "star" witness but recanted or refused to testify.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by Todd Mueller

t's never been confirmed that it was "Dismissed with prejudice." There were a couple newspaper articles that mentioned this, but at least one said "Dismissed without prejudice." The problem is that we don't have the correct, or enough, information to draw anything official from this. The fact that he was ever charged tells me at some point someone felt they had a case against Tim. Perhaps it was only circumstantial, though.

All of the updates for UM have stated that it was dismissed with prejudice. The one article from 93 does say "without prejudice", but I also seem to remember the article getting Tim's age wrong by about 10 years. I think it's legit.

I did read an interesting theory someone posted on reddit years ago about how they thought Tim did in fact find his mother's body prior to the cops finding it, but didn't tell them because he feared it would make him look more suspicious. Which is why he gave the weird "holy spirit" answer.

[Todd Mueller]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

All of the updates for UM have stated that it was dismissed with prejudice. The one article from 93 does say "without prejudice", but I also seem to remember the article getting Tim's age wrong by about 10 years. I think it's legit.

Haha! I didn't catch the age thing... Yeah, I wouldn't doubt if they got the dismissal backwards but the fact that it was reported once that way and the fact that "dismissed with prejudice" sounds pretty rare makes me wonder. Plus, I have come to question the accuracy of other UM updates. But you are probably correct.

I did read an interesting theory someone posted on reddit years ago about how they thought Tim did in fact find his mother's body prior to the cops finding it, but didn't tell them because he feared it would make him look more suspicious. Which is why he gave the weird "holy spirit" answer.

That totally makes sense. I used to be in the "100% Tim did it" camp but now I'm not sure. I definitely believe he knows more than what he said, whether that is facts or just suspicions. If he knew where the body was and panicked, the "holy spirit" answer fits. However, that would contrast with his interview on UM where he acted surprised that he was a suspect. "It began to dawn on me... Maybe they think I had something to do with this." Uh-huh.

From what little I can piece together from old articles, the sheriff definitely thinks Tim did it and the prosector sounds like he leans towards Tim did it. But most if not all of the evidence was circumstantial. The one article did say his ex-wife backed out of testifying which peaks my curiosity.

Based on the fact Tim went on UM to clear his name and it backfired says a lot. In his own words, he didn't set out to go on UM to catch his mother's killer -- he went on to clear himself. Perhaps that had more to do with how UM produced it and they talked Tim into it. However, he had to see how poorly he came off on that episode. I think Tim did it for the attention and to be on national TV. He seems like a very dim bulb. At times he mentioned that he loved his mother, yet the whole interview was about him. Even if the credit card operator was mistaken, the fact that he avoided the lot where Terri was found and went looking for her purse on the highway really smells.

He may very well be innocent but I would love to know for sure one way or the other.

[Huskerz85]

Originally Posted by Todd Mueller

The one article did say his ex-wife backed out of testifying which peaks my curiosity.

Could she have backed out as a result of the back and forth between the Sheriff and DA?? (i.e. the DA had nothing other than her to rely on and when the Sheriff couldn't produce anything more, they just up and dismissed it)

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by Huskerz85

Could she have backed out as a result of the back and forth between the Sheriff and DA?? (i.e. the DA had nothing other than her to rely on and when the Sheriff couldn't produce anything more, they just up and dismissed it)

I can't fathom why they would dismiss them completely just because of the wife's refusal to testify. They could have dropped the charges and then brought them later if she came around to testifying, or if more evidence came to light that implicated McClure.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by Todd Mueller

Based on the fact Tim went on UM to clear his name and it backfired says a lot. In his own words, he didn't set out to go on UM to catch his mother's killer -- he went on to clear himself. Perhaps that had more to do with how UM produced it and they talked Tim into it. However, he had to see how poorly he came off on that episode. I think Tim did it for the attention and to be on national TV. He seems like a very dim bulb. At times he mentioned that he loved his mother, yet the whole interview was about him. Even if the credit card operator was mistaken, the fact that he avoided the lot where Terri was found and went looking for her purse on the highway really smells.

UM says McClure wanted someone to come forward to substantiate his alibi. McClure says, verbatim, in the unedited segment:

"Perhaps somebody will come forward, maybe they were afraid in the past. Maybe somebody saw something. There has to be somebody out there that's seen something that happened to my mother. Now would be a good time to come out with it."

They edited this out on the Lifetime reruns (I'm guessing to make room for the update).