Leonard Shoen and the U Haul family feud - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Bleedingheart · 07-18-2010, 07:57 PM

Does anyone remember that case and if you do , doe anyone believe that the the murder of Sam Shoens wife was just a botched robbery?

crystaldawn · 07-18-2010, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bleedingheart

Does anyone remember that case and if you do , doe anyone believe that the the murder of Sam Shoens wife was just a botched robbery?

Yes I remember that one well. Personally I don't believe it was tied to the U-Haul feud. I believe the man convicted for her murder was a registered sex offender and I believe his intent that night was rape and robbery.

Corky Kneivel · 07-19-2010, 01:57 PM

This is so weird. This has got to be about the 10th time I came to write on a segment and found a brand new post written about, not having to search for it first. I probably sound like a big time loser but it really gets me half-spooked half-excited me whenever this happens.

ANYHOO…the reason I had wanted to write upon this segment was because of the wholly inaccurate direction both the police as well as the victim’s family were heading with placing the blame on this one. This is one of those segments (akin to the poor college student Brooke who was murdered, the union stewardess at Piney Point, and most famously the Sammy Wheeler segment) in which, in complete disaccord with all of the unexplained and mysterious happenings surrounding the people involved, a random perpetrator happens to be the guilty party. This one is slightly different in my view though because the police were COMPLETELY OFF THE MARK and the LE representative featured on the show had an opinion that was incorrect in every instance. I mean the reasons he listed for supporting LEs theory were 100% opposite as well.****

Admittedly, I am one of the proponents on this board that thinks the vast majority of the time the police do their job competently and we should believe them when they say “we investigated that and there were no leads” or “we don’t feel at this time he/she is a viable suspect”. I feel like I’m in the minority on this, which is totally cool, and that oftentimes I will automatically give the LE the benefit of the doubt when others put more stock into the way UM portrays odd occurrences surrounding a mystery. Had we discussed this segment on these boards I can imagine I would have been expressing opinions based on the police department’s inference that this was NOT a botched burglary. I would have expressed opinions based off the police department’s inference that there were multiple offenders and that they had studied the house and planned the crime thoroughly.

This is a prime example of a time when I would have been dead wrong in my assertions because the LEs (that I would have given the benefit of the doubt to) were dead wrong as well. It also causes me to wonder how LEs dismiss burglary as a motive for break-ins. Is it solely based off their interpretation of the crime scene and that nothing seems to be missing?

**** - I understand that there still remains a possibility that the responsible offender was enlisted to commit this crime by the rival Shoen family faction, however I consider that an extremely unlikely “possibility” (those are sarcastiquotes right there) at best.

Kane · 07-21-2010, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystaldawn

Yes I remember that one well. Personally I don't believe it was tied to the U-Haul feud. I believe the man convicted for her murder was a registered sex offender and I believe his intent that night was rape and robbery.

This was the subject of a Cold Case Files episode titled "Terror In Telluride." Although Sam Shoen doesn't doubt Frank Marquis killed Eva, he's not convinced the case is completely solved. Sam is convinced that Frank had an accomplice; he believes that, because Eva was strong, it had to have taken more than one person to overpower her. As I recall, it was mentioned in the CCF episode that there were some needle marks on Eva's body, suggesting that someone tried to sedate her. This may not have been public knowledge before (which could explain why it was not mentioned on UM).

In any case, there hasn't been any other evidence to implicate anyone other than Frank Marquis. Needless to say, however, it doesn't necessarily disprove Sam's theory of an accomplice.

economistman192 · 06-11-2012, 04:46 PM

How do you brag about killing someone with two kids? What kind of world do we live in?

07-18-2010, 07:57 PM	#1
Bleedingheart Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Jan 27, 2006 Posts: 110	Leonard Shoen and the U Haul family feud Does anyone remember that case and if you do , doe anyone believe that the the murder of Sam Shoens wife was just a botched robbery?

07-19-2010, 01:57 PM	#3
Corky Kneivel Member Forum Regular Join Date: Feb 12, 2007 Location: Sacratomato Posts: 570	This is so weird. This has got to be about the 10th time I came to write on a segment and found a brand new post written about, not having to search for it first. I probably sound like a big time loser but it really gets me half-spooked half-excited me whenever this happens. ANYHOO…the reason I had wanted to write upon this segment was because of the wholly inaccurate direction both the police as well as the victim’s family were heading with placing the blame on this one. This is one of those segments (akin to the poor college student Brooke who was murdered, the union stewardess at Piney Point, and most famously the Sammy Wheeler segment) in which, in complete disaccord with all of the unexplained and mysterious happenings surrounding the people involved, a random perpetrator happens to be the guilty party. This one is slightly different in my view though because the police were COMPLETELY OFF THE MARK and the LE representative featured on the show had an opinion that was incorrect in every instance. I mean the reasons he listed for supporting LEs theory were 100% opposite as well.** Admittedly, I am one of the proponents on this board that thinks the vast majority of the time the police do their job competently and we should believe them when they say “we investigated that and there were no leads” or “we don’t feel at this time he/she is a viable suspect”. I feel like I’m in the minority on this, which is totally cool, and that oftentimes I will automatically give the LE the benefit of the doubt when others put more stock into the way UM portrays odd occurrences surrounding a mystery. Had we discussed this segment on these boards I can imagine I would have been expressing opinions based on the police department’s inference that this was NOT a botched burglary. I would have expressed opinions based off the police department’s inference that there were multiple offenders and that they had studied the house and planned the crime thoroughly. This is a prime example of a time when I would have been dead wrong in my assertions because the LEs (that I would have given the benefit of the doubt to) were dead wrong as well. It also causes me to wonder how LEs dismiss burglary as a motive for break-ins. Is it solely based off their interpretation of the crime scene and that nothing seems to be missing? ****** - I understand that there still remains a possibility that the responsible offender was enlisted to commit this crime by the rival Shoen family faction, however I consider that an extremely unlikely “possibility” (those are sarcastiquotes right there) at best.

06-11-2012, 04:46 PM	#5
economistman192 Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Apr 18, 2011 Posts: 112	How do you brag about killing someone with two kids? What kind of world do we live in?