Any chance Stephen Marfeo is innocent in Doreen's disapperance?

[wiseguy182]

I watched this one yet again yesterday, and ended up having a completely different take on it. Perhaps I just missed some things the first couple times around.

-At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

-Doreen's sister mentions that Doreen *did* have an affair years earlier and had even contemplated leaving Stephen, and that she and her husband had to talk Doreen into staying in the marriage. It makes you wonder if Doreen really did run off with this man or another man, possibly to another country. It may also explain why she quit her job.

-Speaking of the sister, not only does she believe in Stephen's innocence, but so does her mother. And FWIW, the sister says all of Stephen's friends believed in his innocence. Can this many people be fooled?

-At first glance, Stephen taking a longer lunch break seems suspicious, but let's analyze this. He took a 70 minute lunch break the day Doreen disappeared, his lunch breaks usually took 20-30 minutes. Therefore, his lunch break that day was an hour and ten minutes and slightly longer than twice as long as normal. There were no signs of a struggle at their house.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

For most of the last 10 years, I thought he was guilty, but that's a lot of nagging questions.

[LooksLikeCRicci]

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

Without trying to start a war, I would point out that O.J. Simpson very famously offered a reward to find "the real killer" of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Scott Peterson took part in the numerous searches for Laci. For those of us who have bickered on the Kurt Cobain thread, Courtney Love hired a private investigator (who now totally thinks she murdered Cobain.) I don't necessarily think that hiring an investigator is proof of innocence.

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

I don't know if you've listened to Serial, but a jury determined that Adnan Syad was able to kill his ex-girlfriend, drive across town, and bury the body in less time than that. It only takes a minute of so to strangle someone to death. I'm not a forensic pathologist, but I would venture a guess that Doreen was killed via strangulation after an argument with Stephen. Quick, personal, and no big bloody mess to clean up. I think it's entirely possible he could have done this in less than an hour.

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

Maybe I'm mixing up segments or the plot of a bad detective movie, but didn't the typewritten note have a jumping "o"? And when they got a sample from the typewriter at his mother's house, it had the same jumping "o"?

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

That's a tougher question, but I would point you to a lot of cases where the killers have implicated themselves for one reason or another. I think you just highlighted a Charley Project case on another thread where it's believed that a young softball player was killed by an umpire who played softball with her. I only skimmed the profile, but it seemed that he had been calling attention to himself for quite some time and throwing around hints that he had killed her.

Perhaps Stephen did this in an attempt to draw attention off of himself, hoping that law enforcement would ask the same questions: WHY would Stephen write the letter implicating himself? I agree, it doesn't make much sense. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. At the end of his life, Stephen Marfeo did a lot of things that didn't make sense.

I think you raise a lot of good points, Wiseguy. In the end, though, I'm still voting guilty.

[Hambone2421]

Solid points by both of you on this. I never did find it odd that Stephen would type up that letter. Only because all he would have to tell detectives is, "why in the world would I type a letter implicating myself?".

I think the biggest red flag on him is that he shot his girlfriend years later and then killed himself.

[RobinW]

Originally Posted by Hambone2421

Solid points by both of you on this. I never did find it odd that Stephen would type up that letter. Only because all he would have to tell detectives is, "why in the world would I type a letter implicating myself?".

I think the biggest red flag on him is that he shot his girlfriend years later and then killed himself.

Yeah, those are some good points in favour of Stephen and I would definitely feel a lot more ambiguous about his guilt if it wasn't for the murder-suicide nine years later.

By comparison, even though I used to think Paul Pollis was 100 % guilty, there have been plenty of valid points brought up on this board which make me think his case isn't as cut-and-dried as it appears. Of course, Paul has had a ton of trouble with the law following his wife's disappearance. You can either interpret his self-destructive lifestyle as being the result of massive guilt over his wife's death, or being driven to the breaking point by all the false accusations he's had to face. But the key difference between Paul Pollis and Stephen Marfeo is that Paul's crimes have all been related to drugs and embezzlement and I don't believe he's ever had any documented incidents of violence. It just seems like a huge stretch that a completely innocent man could be falsely accused of murdering his wife and then react by REALLY murdering his girlfriend years later.

The odds of that seem pretty miniscule, though I'm actually curious if there are many documented cases of a situation like that happening...

[MegtheEgg86]

Re: Stephen's 70-minute lunch break

I'm not sure Stephen would have necessarily had to have committed the crime, cleaned up, and staged the scene all within that 70-minute time span. I think it's possible he could have killed Doreen, left her in the home, and later returned after work to complete "the job". In fact, I strongly think a similar scenario is likely what occurred in the Christi Nichols case. I think Mark Nichols killed his wife (intentionally or unintentionally), and then disposed of her body the next day after rushing their children over to Christi's grandmother's house.
I could envision something much like this occurring in this case.

[Necco]

Bringing this over from another thread about Stephen (Yes, I'm quoting myself because that's how I roll.)



I'm not entirely convinced Stephen killed Doreen. I think he knew more than he was saying, but I'm not convinced he killed her.

A few things: The type written letters were analyzed by a Dr. Murray Miron in the psychology department at Syracuse University. Dr Miron's bad analysis of David Koresh's writing played a big part in the fiasco that was Waco.

Check out this link:
https://books.google.com/books?id=WJ...racuse&f=false

In addition to this, at this time, Syracuse's psychology/education department was in the middle of a "breakthrough" that would eventually turn into a heartbreaking fraud for thousands of parents: facilitated communication for severe autism. Heralded by Syracuse as a wonder, proper scientific method was ignored and eventually facilitated communication was discredited in most cases.


I'd also be very curious to know Stephen's father's name. That may hold a clue to what happened if he didn't kill Doreen.

Did anyone else find it interesting that none of Stephen's family appeared on camera?

It is Rhode Island. It is possible there are reasons his family didn't want to appear on camera. Marfeo is a little bit of a famous last name in certain circles in Rhode Island/Boston/Eastern CT.

Read this.
http://americanmafia.com/Cities/New_...rovidence.html

[LilMissKryssy]

He did it without a doubt in my mind but everyone in entitled to their opinions.

The change in behavior. He had his wife followed for no reason other than he's paranoid and had to know her every move and then he doesn't report her missing for 3 days. ? People don't change their deep ingrained patterns of behavior over night like that.

In regards to Doreen's family, if they believed he was guilty that would mean that had to accept she was not only murdered but that they might never find her remains. Some people would rather live in denial as its too overpowering emotionally to accept the other scenario. Also the episode was filmed almost 25 years ago. Who knows what opinion (especially after his murder-suicide of his girlfriend) Doreen's family has now.

The acts Stephan committed years later again goes back to the same pattern of deep ingrained behaviors and thinking. Unless somebody undergoes intense and consistent behavioral therapy for an extended period of time (they would have to acknowledge they have a problem in the first place) its extremely unlikely these patterns would just disappear or that If Stephan was a rational and emotionally healthy man when Doreen disappeared but then committed those atrocious acts he later did it doesn't fit. He was disturbed then and was when he killed again IMO.

[TheCars1986]

-Marfeo did not report his wife missing for two days.

-Marfeo claimed to be the last person seen alive with Doreen.

-Doreen left without her toothbrush, her pets, and her car. There was also no money missing (over $50,000) in the Marfeo's bank accounts.

-Marfeo hired a PI to follow Doreen around which resulted in no evidence that she was being unfaithful.

-Doreen quit her job to work on her marriage.

He did it.

[wiseguy182]

Originally Posted by LilMissKryssy

The change in behavior. He had his wife followed for no reason other than he's paranoid and had to know her every move and then he doesn't report her missing for 3 days. ? People don't change their deep ingrained patterns of behavior over night like that.

I agree, it does seem odd he would have his wife followed by two private investigators. But, I think there might be a rational explanation for that. The segment mentions Doreen was suffering from what seemed like panic attacks in the middle of the night, and she seemed like she was on the edge of a nervous breakdown, but never revealed much info about that to Stephen. I think perhaps Stephen was concerned about her and that she was trying to hide something from him, and that could be the reason for the private investigators.

Originally Posted by LilMissKryssy

In regards to Doreen's family, if they believed he was guilty that would mean that had to accept she was not only murdered but that they might never find her remains. Some people would rather live in denial as its too overpowering emotionally to accept the other scenario. Also the episode was filmed almost 25 years ago. Who knows what opinion (especially after his murder-suicide of his girlfriend) Doreen's family has now.

Not to get too technical, but Doreen disappeared 25 years ago, the segment was filmed 3 years after her disappearance.

[wiseguy182]

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

Without trying to start a war, I would point out that O.J. Simpson very famously offered a reward to find "the real killer" of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. Scott Peterson took part in the numerous searches for Laci. For those of us who have bickered on the Kurt Cobain thread, Courtney Love hired a private investigator (who now totally thinks she murdered Cobain.) I don't necessarily think that hiring an investigator is proof of innocence.

I've always scratched my head, wondering how Kurt Cobain, who essentially pioneered an entire genre of music, ended up with a musical footnote like Courtney Love.

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

I don't know if you've listened to Serial, but a jury determined that Adnan Syad was able to kill his ex-girlfriend, drive across town, and bury the body in less time than that. It only takes a minute of so to strangle someone to death. I'm not a forensic pathologist, but I would venture a guess that Doreen was killed via strangulation after an argument with Stephen. Quick, personal, and no big bloody mess to clean up. I think it's entirely possible he could have done this in less than an hour.

But wouldn't Stephen have scratches and stuff? He went back to work. Also, this probably means Stephen loaded her up in his car, rode around with the body, and dumped her all in broad daylight, with nobody seeing it?

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

Maybe I'm mixing up segments or the plot of a bad detective movie, but didn't the typewritten note have a jumping "o"? And when they got a sample from the typewriter at his mother's house, it had the same jumping "o"?

I honestly have never heard of that, but even if it's true, could Stephen's mother or somebody else with access to it type the letter?

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

I think you raise a lot of good points, Wiseguy.

Thanks.

[everprincess]

Okay so now he is dead so if she ran away why not come out of hiding all these years? I'm sorry but she is dead and he killed her.

He stuck me as a possessive husband. He had plenty of time to get rid of evidence, clean up any signs of a struggle and hide her body.

8 times of 10 when a wife or husband goes missing or is killed the spouse did it. Those are pretty staggering odds.

I've not seen this segment in a few months but I'm cleaning out my DVR. I think I have about 30 left to watch. I'm trying to see the Mary cases but so far I'm having no luck. I wish I'd know about the DVD sets years ago but I was working 2 jobs then.

[everprincess]

Why do think he got rid of her body that day? He had plenty of time to dispose of her later that night.

Where do all these missing spouses go? I think we could all name over 20 spouses missing who husbands are prime suspects but the bodies have never been found. Sure is puzzling.....

[Janel "Jaycee" Miller]

Originally Posted by everprincess

Why do think he got rid of her body that day? He had plenty of time to dispose of her later that night.

Where do all these missing spouses go? I think we could all name over 20 spouses missing who husbands are prime suspects but the bodies have never been found. Sure is puzzling.....

I can't speak to Connecticut specifically. I've lived in either the suburbs of New Jersey or Pennsylvania my entire life, but I have traveled to 34 of our 50 states, and time again I'm amazed at how rural certain places can be.

There's a stretch of US Highway (really think its US Highway 160) on the way to Four Corners in the southwest that as I drove past a small scattering of houses to the Four Corners site, myself & my travelling companion thought where do these folks grocery shop? how far's the closest trauma center if there's a bad accident out this way? where do their kids go to school? On a different trip I was driving in Wyoming and drove past a sign that welcomed me to Emblem, and informed me the population of the town was a grand total of 10 and found myself asking the same questions. Heck the entire state of Wyoming has about 620,000 people. The city of Philadelphia has over 1.5 million residents.

So IMHO, it is possible that a spouse could kill another spouse, hide the body, & tragically, the body never be found. Allow me to also point out I'm a geography geek, so please don't think me too harsh, it's just one of the things I'm a little passionate about.

[DALLASTEXAN!!]

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

I watched this one yet again yesterday, and ended up having a completely different take on it. Perhaps I just missed some things the first couple times around.

-At the beginning of the segment, Stack mentions that Stephen Marefo paid thousands of dollars to investigate his wife's disappearance and was active in getting the case publicized on television and in newspapers. Okay, this doesn't seem like the work of a murderer. Usually, guilty parties just hope the case goes away and try to attract as little publicity as possible to it.

-Doreen's sister mentions that Doreen *did* have an affair years earlier and had even contemplated leaving Stephen, and that she and her husband had to talk Doreen into staying in the marriage. It makes you wonder if Doreen really did run off with this man or another man, possibly to another country. It may also explain why she quit her job.

-Speaking of the sister, not only does she believe in Stephen's innocence, but so does her mother. And FWIW, the sister says all of Stephen's friends believed in his innocence. Can this many people be fooled?

-At first glance, Stephen taking a longer lunch break seems suspicious, but let's analyze this. He took a 70 minute lunch break the day Doreen disappeared, his lunch breaks usually took 20-30 minutes. Therefore, his lunch break that day was an hour and ten minutes and slightly longer than twice as long as normal. There were no signs of a struggle at their house.

Now, in slightly over an hour, does Stephen have time to drive home, kill Doreen, remove the items that were missing (suitcase, clothes, money), straighten up the house, dump her body and her belongings in a place that hasn't been found 25 years later, freshen up, and drive back to his workplace. All in just barely over an hour?

-The typewriter thing bugs me. How in the hell did they prove it came from his mother's typewriter? The only way that would be possible is if they got a hold of the typewriter and unwound the ribbons or something like that (which is possible under certain circumstances). It seems that, at best, they could determine it came from the same model as his mother's typewriter, but how did they determine they came from that typewriter specifically?

-If Stephen is guilty, why on Earth would he write the letter implicating himself, with the detailed account of how he killed Doreen? I just can't fathom what possible motivation he would have for doing that.

For most of the last 10 years, I thought he was guilty, but that's a lot of nagging questions.

I've always thought he was guilty. Didn't it come out later that he beat and killed another woman then killed himself? I would need to watch this again for all of the details so I can't really comment on those.

Families can side with him and they were probably fond of him and that does hold a lot of weight. In some cases that would be enough to change my mind..but not this one. I would be curious if any of the family members have since changed their minds.

As far as him seeking out people....other killers have done this. didn't tim mclure do that(and even acted as himself LOL!!)

and the circleville writer. who else did this on UM? I'm sure there are plenty more.

[DALLASTEXAN!!]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

Re: Stephen's 70-minute lunch break

I'm not sure Stephen would have necessarily had to have committed the crime, cleaned up, and staged the scene all within that 70-minute time span. I think it's possible he could have killed Doreen, left her in the home, and later returned after work to complete "the job". In fact, I strongly think a similar scenario is likely what occurred in the Christi Nichols case. I think Mark Nichols killed his wife (intentionally or unintentionally), and then disposed of her body the next day after rushing their children over to Christi's grandmother's house.
I could envision something much like this occurring in this case.

good point. the longer lunch break definitely is an eyebrow raiser. and Mark Nichols knowing the entire contents of Christi's bag that she allegedly packed kind of nails that one for me.