All Episodes Talk: 48 Hours

[starri]

I do not like Kelly Siegler, any more than I like any other prosecutor on this show who has acted in bad faith to secure a conviction.  She's been accused of at dealing dirty in at least 2 out of 60-something murder cases she prosecuted.  Which means that the remaining ones, no matter how straight-forward they are, also become suspect.  Sorry.  Seriously, fuck her.

 

Her biggest crime is putting me on the same side as Dick DeGuerin.  She should face charges for that.

[walnutqueen]

Kelly Siegler LOVES circumstantial cases, and has said so on Cold Justice more than once.  She has an incredible conviction rate; probably due to the fact that she is able to get juries to connect the dots she draws for them, and is capable of swaying them with her arguments when the evidence is not clear, or not there.  But I think she stacks the deck in her favor by sometimes withholding exculpatory evidence or playing fast and loose with the rules, too, in order to maintain that illustrious reputation and conviction record..

 

This particular case is very troubling, and shows her in a most unfavorable light.

[stillhere1900]

Yes this David temple case is very scary. I don't think he would have killed his baby, nine months pregnant. You need more evidence than that to send someone to jail and ruin their whole family.

 

Apparently you don't. 

[stillhere1900]

Kelly Siegler LOVES circumstantial cases, and has said so on Cold Justice more than once.  She has an incredible conviction rate; probably due to the fact that she is able to get juries to connect the dots she draws for them, and is capable of swaying them with her arguments when the evidence is not clear, or not there.  But I think she stacks the deck in her favor by sometimes withholding exculpatory evidence or playing fast and loose with the rules, too, in order to maintain that illustrious reputation and conviction record..

 

This particular case is very troubling, and shows her in a most unfavorable light.

 

This^^   She kept saying that the defense got all the evidence 'the law required her to give them'. Does that mean that she may have had evidence that would have helped clear David, but she wasn't required by law to turn it over?

 

She just kept saying that over and over.  The Reporter (can't find his name) looked like he was getting very frustrated with The DA 'Kelly Seigler.

[Mrs. P.]

I am from Houston, where Kelly Sigler was something of a rock star. She is in some serious legal trouble, according to local reports. There have been 4 lawsuits filed against her personally for her actions while prosecuting cases, and the DA's office is facing reviews of all of her cases. In addition, some suits have been filed against her and TNT for the portrayals seen in her Cold Case series. I think one of them even names Dick Wolf, the series producer, as a defendant. Things aren't looking good for her. And I don't expect a return of Cold Justice any time soon.

[Fable]

Did 48 Hours air this case originally?  I remember seeing something about this one before, but I'm not sure if it was 48 Hours or not.   I don't remember what I thought at that time about David Temple's innocence or guilt, but this episode certainly had me side-eyeing Kelly Sielger.

[Enigma X]

What struck me as odd before concerning Kelly Siegler on Cold Justice is that her partner, I forget her name, was always a proponent of hard evidence (such as DNA) and Kelly would always dismiss her. It bothered me.

[starri]

This^^   She kept saying that the defense got all the evidence 'the law required her to give them'. Does that mean that she may have had evidence that would have helped clear David, but she wasn't required by law to turn it over?

 

She just kept saying that over and over.  The Reporter (can't find his name) looked like he was getting very frustrated with The DA 'Kelly Seigler.

I think it was even worse than that.  She kept saying that the law required her to turn over all potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense, and then proceeded to say that she was the one who determined what was and wasn't exculpatory.

[Ohmo]

I am from Houston, where Kelly Sigler was something of a rock star. She is in some serious legal trouble, according to local reports. There have been 4 lawsuits filed against her personally for her actions while prosecuting cases, and the DA's office is facing reviews of all of her cases. In addition, some suits have been filed against her and TNT for the portrayals seen in her Cold Case series. I think one of them even names Dick Wolf, the series producer, as a defendant. Things aren't looking good for her. And I don't expect a return of Cold Justice any time soon.

 

Thanks for this information.  I was wondering about the fate of Cold Justice.  I like that show, but I can't fault TNT.  If I were in charge of that network, I'd be sprinting away from Kelly at the moment.

 

Did 48 Hours air this case originally?  I remember seeing something about this one before, but I'm not sure if it was 48 Hours or not.   I don't remember what I thought at that time about David Temple's innocence or guilt, but this episode certainly had me side-eyeing Kelly Sielger.

 

I think both Dateline and 48 Hours have done it, but I believe that 48 Hours was the first to do it.

 

Hasn't Kelly also prosecuted a third TV crime case---the one where Laura and Colten murdered a girl named Jennifer?  They then fled to Mexico.  Laura was jailed, then released, then tried again, I think.  I know that was 48 Hours, and I think CBS is how people outside of Texas became aware of Kellly.  That girl Laura scared the crap out of me, and do did Colten.  If Kelly was the prosecutor, that will be scary if those two are unleashed on Texas again.  Yikes!

 

Could Kelly be criminally charged in any of this, or is it more civil action and potential disbarment?.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Ohmo

[biakbiak]

Kelly's attitude was beyond troubling. I have never liked her, even if I thought the defendant was guilty, her manner and tone is always so dismissve. Her hand waving the inconsistencies in the other suspects changing story while stating he has always been truthful made me want to smack her! And her insisting that the other teacher was referring to an earlier phone call when she said, that after Belinda left the meeting at 3:20 or 3:30 other teachers told her she called David from the school which matches the phone records of a call at 3:32 is beyond disturbing. She can't handle facts that don't fit her narrative.

[RedheadZombie]

Yes this David temple case is very scary. I don't think he would have killed his baby, nine months pregnant. You need more evidence than that to send someone to jail and ruin their whole family.

I don't think he did it, but advanced pregnancy has never stopped a man from killing his partner. Murder used to be the number one cause of death for a pregnant woman.

The show started late so my DVR missed the last fifteen minutes. Can anyone tell me what happened?

[Ohmo]

The show started late so my DVR missed the last fifteen minutes. Can anyone tell me what happened?

The decision as to whether David Temple gets a new trial is now in the hands of the Texas Court of Criminal Justice--or something like that.  It had a specific name that I've never heard of before.  It wasn't the Court of Appeals or anything like that, but I can't remember the name.  Anyway, the show said this court could rule at any time.

David is still in prison waiting for this ruling. Kelly is also pleased because she seems to believe that this court will rule in her favor.  She thinks that the judge who ruled against her and set this thing in motion is wrong.  When Richard Schlesinger pressed Kelly about the judge being wrong about all 30+ points that he brought up, she did not back down from the use of the word "wrong."  So, it appears to be a waiting game.

 

Article from August 2015 (the most recent I could find)

Kelly Siegler responds to allegations in Katy murder case

 

Also from August 2015

TNT & ‘Cold Justice’ Producers Sued By Acquitted Murder Suspect

Edited March 14, 2016 by Ohmo

[ToukieSmith]

Yes this David temple case is very scary. I don't think he would have killed his baby, nine months pregnant. You need more evidence than that to send someone to jail and ruin their whole family.

 

I read the book Shattered about the Belinda and Erin Temple murder and I believe David killed his wife.  The day Belinda was murdered, David was supposed to be home taking care of Evan because he was sick.  Evan's school called Belinda at work; Belinda picked him up and brought him home.  She left instructions for his care on the counter, then returned to work; David was supposed to be at home taking care of him.  Its funny that the neighbor's kid decided to kill Belinda at a time that David should have been at home.  Its also coincidental that Mr. Temple Sr. bought all of his sons 12 gauge shotguns according to the testimony of a witness at trial that hunted with the Temple family, but Mr. Temple Sr. said he bought David a 20 gauge shotgun (he confirmed that he bought David's brothers 12 gauge shotguns however).  Its really interesting that every neighbor on the Temple's street said that their dog was vicious.  Additionally, the police could not get past the vicious dog when they arrived at the scene to investigate what they initial thought was a break in at the Temple's house.  They were going to shoot the dog to gain access to the house when David came out and grabbed the dog so the police could go into the house.  How did the neighbor's son get past the dog?

 

When the crime scene investigator reviewed the body, they were confused because they could not find the blood splatter.  After awhile, someone moved the clothes on the rod across from the body and the blood spatter from the gun shot was found.  So the next door neighbor's kid took the time to hide the blood spatter behind the clothes because........

 

Nothing was stolen from the house.  In addition to the TV, there was jewelry in the crime scene photos laying on a dresser.

 

The case was brought to trial due to pressure from Belinda's family.  If you believe the police, they said that neither David nor any other member of the Temple family ever inquired about leads on his wife's death.

 

At trial, they tested the defense theory that the glass shards were scattered because David swung the door open and the door hit a hutch that was behind the door.  The markings on the door did not line up with the hutch.  Thus, the door swinging onto the hutch did not cause the shards to fall on the carpet as was seen in the crime scene photos. 

 

DeGuerin cross examined Riley Joe Sanders at the original trial.  He presented to the jury that he thought Riley Joe Sanders killed Belinda Temple because she told his parents that he was truant.  The jury knew that Riley Joe Sanders had access to a 12 gauge shot gun.  I agree with Kelly on this one.  There is no new information here.

 

Many local attorney's do not agree with Judge Gist according to what I have read.  We will see what the Court of Appeals has to say.  My aunt is a local defense attorney and she does not like Siegler.  I don't know anything about Siegler to like her or hate her.

 

After reading the book on this case, I think David is where he is supposed to be. 

[Ohmo]

Harris County DA's Office Response to Judge Gist's ruling.  (It's a PDF.)

 

http://lonestarforensicgroup.com/Response/

[Diana Berry]

Sorry the file is not coming up for me. What was the ruling?

[ToukieSmith]

Sorry the file is not coming up for me. What was the ruling?

There is no ruling.  The Harris County DA's office refuted Judge Gist's opinion point by point in the pdf Ohmo provided above.  The matter is with the Court of Appeals.

[CaughtOnTape]

Kelly Siegler is one of those people who makes me insane because she just CANNOT and WILL NOT admit that there is a possibility that something happened outside of the way she thinks it happened.  I don't know anyone who walks around with such conviction in the way they see things.  Is she married?  That kind of attitude has to be frustrating as hell in a marriage.

[Ohmo]

 Is she married?  That kind of attitude has to be frustrating as hell in a marriage.

 

According to IMDB, yes, she is.  Her husband is a doctor (the site is not specific as to what kind of doctor), and they have 2 children.

[UsernameFatigue]

I read the book Shattered about the Belinda and Erin Temple murder and I believe David killed his wife.

 

That is one thing that I dislike about these shows (Dateline is the same) - they often are very vague about why someone has been convicted and leave out crucial evidence. I do vaguely remember though when the case was covered by one of the shows and thought that David was guilty. One thing where I gave him the side eye on this show was when he said that if Belinda had not been murdered they would still be together. Yet his mistress who he tried to pass of as just a fling he ended up marrying a few years after Belinda's murder and is still married to. Yeah, right.

 

I also didn't think they really had anything on the neighbourhood kid. He said a few things to the friend that he supposedly confessed to that didn't make sense. First of all that Belinda wasn't supposed to be home at the time he went into the house. Why wouldn't she be home? The school day had ended - it wasn't like it was the middle of the day. Also saying that he shot the dog when the dog was alive and well.  I also thought the fact that Belinda was shot in her closet made it unlikely that the neighbour shot her. If she was home and he broke in by breaking glass she would have heard it most likely. She would either come to investigate or if she decided to hide she would go into the closet and close the door. The neighbour would have no reason to know she was there. Yet the neighbour supposedly shot her in her closet but  left jewellry that was out in plain sight in the bedroom? Also if he didn't think there was anyone home why bring a shotgun?

 

Seems more likely that David shot her in the back (she was found face down from what I remember). She was going into her closet and had no reason to think her hubby was behind her ready to kill her.

 

As far as Kelly S. goes though, I have never liked her. I also never liked the show Cold Justice as not once can I remember watching a show where she found enough evidence to bring someone to trial. It was always a case of where she would find someone who she THOUGHT murdered the victim and it seemed that that was good enough for her. I always wondered why someone would not sue her/the production company for slander as if there wasn't enough evidence to arrest that person she has ruined their life/reputation without solid proof.

Edited March 17, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[biakbiak]

. First of all that Belinda wasn't supposed to be home at the time he went into the house. Why wouldn't she be home? The school day had ended -

Granddaughter, niece and now friend of many school teachers just because school is out doesnt mean their day is done at school (I realize teachers and schools can differ). As it was she was in a meeting to either either 3:20 or a little bit later and the prosecution case even indicates she would not have been home much before 4:00pm when the murder occurred according to their timeline.

Edited March 17, 2016 by biakbiak

[UsernameFatigue]

Granddaughter, niece and now friend of many school teachers just because school is out doesnt mean their day is done at school (I realize teachers and schools can differ). As it was she was in a meeting to either either 3:20 or a little bit later and the prosecution case even indicates she would not have been home much before 4:00pm when the murder occurred according to their timeline.

 

Yes, I have a niece, nephew and many friends who are teachers and they leave school at varying times at the end of the school day. Yes, we know that Belinda was in a meeting at 3:20. However the neighbourhood kid did not know that.  The defense said the murder happened around 4:30pm so even for a school teacher, let alone one with a young son, being home at 4:30 would hardly be unreasonable. So since the neighbourhood kid skipped school that day he had all day to break into the house - why wait until it is quite possible that at least one of the people living there would be home? Makes no sense.

 

Also according to a post above, Belinda brought Evan home from his school as he was sick and David came home to look after him. Then when Belinda got home from school David took Evan out to run errands. What mother, whose child was so sick (and obviously wasn't sick when he was taken to school in the morning) he was brought home from school would turn around when she got home and want her husband to take the sick child out to run errands? Not likely.

 

I don't have a problem with David getting a new trial due to the evidence being withheld but I think he will end up right back where he is now.

 

Edited to add - also why would the neighbourhood kid wait until late afternoon to break into a house when quite possibly other neighbours would be arriving home from work or at home at that time and possibly hear not only breaking glass (if say they were outside) and/ or of course a gun shot.

Edited March 17, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[ToukieSmith]

 

Yet his mistress who he tried to pass of as just a fling he ended up marrying a few years after Belinda's murder and is still married to. Yeah, right.

 

I also didn't think they really had anything on the neighbourhood kid. He said a few things to the friend that he supposedly confessed to that didn't make sense. First of all that Belinda wasn't supposed to be home at the time he went into the house. Why wouldn't she be home? The school day had ended - it wasn't like it was the middle of the day. Also saying that he shot the dog when the dog was alive and well.  I also thought the fact that Belinda was shot in her closet made it unlikely that the neighbour shot her. If she was home and he broke in by breaking glass she would have heard it most likely. She would either come to investigate or if she decided to hide she would go into the closet and close the door. The neighbour would have no reason to know she was there. Yet the neighbour supposedly shot her in her closet but  left jewellry that was out in plain sight in the bedroom? Also if he didn't think there was anyone home why bring a shotgun?

 

Part of the problem with David's defense was that his family and Heather tried to downplay his relationship with Heather, calling it just a fling.  They kept portraying Belinda as being the love of David's life, but obviously she wasn't if he was cheating her.  He married Heather so obviously it wasn't just a fling.  Heather's roommate testified that Heather and David got together again soon after the murder whereas they said they did not.  Brenda Lucas (Belinda's sister) testified at trial.  She had visited them during the holiday's prior to the murder (Belinda was murdered in January 1999) and she testified that Belinda and David fought and that David went hunting with his friends and left his very pregnant wife at home.  In reality, David was not hunting, he was with Heather.  He lied about stuff he did not need to lie about.

 

Belinda stopped at David's parents house before she got home the day of her murder.  She brought home some dinner from their house; the container of food was on the counter in the crime scene photos.  She never got the chance to refrigerate it.  How did Riley Joe Sanders know when Belinda was arriving at home?  I cannot imagine a teenage boy sitting at the front window, watching for the neighbor to come home all afternoon.

 

 

Edited to add - also why would the neighbourhood kid wait until late afternoon to break into a house when quite possibly other neighbours would be arriving home from work or at home at that time and possibly hear not only breaking glass (if say they were outside) and/ or of course a gun shot.

 

Their neighborhood was very busy at this time of day according to investigators.  It would be stupid to walk around in broad daylight with a shotgun in your hand if the intent was to murder the person next door.  Teenagers are stupid, but I don't think they are that stupid.

 

Oh, and by the way, who carries a shotgun to a burglary?  How was Riley Joe Sanders going to carry the shotgun and the TV without being incredibly conspicuous in a busy neighborhood at 5ish in the afternoon?

 

The totality of information presented convicted David.

Edited March 17, 2016 by ToukieSmith

[UsernameFatigue]

All great points ToukieSmith. And those type of TVs are incredibly heavy and awkward to carry. We used to have a couple and my hubby who is a big strong guy had a hard time moving then given their weight and size and shape. I don't see a teenager being able to carry one, let alone a shotgun too.  And yes, who takes a shotgun to a burglary where no one is supposed to be home, and if you are carrying a weapon just in case it is going to be a lot smaller. You would take the stuff that is lying out and obvious, like jewellry which was not touched.

 

Who is stupid enough to continue on with a relationship with a mistress after the wife is murdered unless there is something there?  If she meant nothing you would dump her and then find someone else. Obviously she meant more to him than his wife, son and unborn daughter did even before he killed his wife or he would not have been cheating with her to start with.

[Kenz]

I 'm wondering if anyone knows if the three and a half year old son who would have been in the house, I assume, if his father shot his mother with a very loud shotgun, was asked about seeing his mother when they left for the store, or if his father came downstairs after a loud boom, etc. It seems as if a child of that age could verbalize what he saw on that day.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Kenz

[UsernameFatigue]

That is a good question Kenz. I googled a bit to see if I could find any information relating to that but didn't. I did find this which is the prosecution's timeline:

 

Belinda Temple got home from her job as a special education teacher at Katy High School.

The couple's son Evan, 3, was home from day care with a fever. David Temple left his job as a coach at Hastings High School in Alief ISD early that day to be with Evan.

For months before the shooting, David Temple had been having sex with another teacher and had told her days before that he was falling in love.

The illicit couple said their affair could not continue with occasional late-night meetings after teacher happy hours and a stolen New Year's weekend.

After Belinda got home, she was in the walk-in closet in the master bedroom to change clothes when she felt the barrel of the 12-gauge shotgun at the back of her head.

The explosion destroyed the glasses she was wearing as the buckshot exited the right side of her face. Unable to bear looking at the blood, Temple pushed clothes hanging in the closet over the mess, Siegler said.

In a hurry, David Temple staged a burglary, she said, but didn't take anything. He didn't even disconnect the television from the electricity or the cable. He broke out the window of the couple's back door while it was still open and left it open.

He then took Evan, who had either been sleeping or in the backyard, and put him in his truck. In his rush, he didn't put him in a car seat.

The two drove past the park where Temple later told authorities he took Evan. He drove north to the neighborhood where he grew up, went to a grocery store and bought two drinks and cat food. He then took Evan to Home Depot where he didn't buy anything.

The two then returned home where Evan stayed in the garage before David discovered that his back door window was broken.

He took his son to a neighbor's house and went to find his dead wife with, the prosecutor said, no fear that a burglar would also kill him.

A month later, he sent flowers to his mistress Heather Scott for Valentine's Day, testimony showed. Two years after the shooting, he asked her to marry him.

 

Once again, why would a father who has come home to take care of his child who has a fever a few hours later take him supposedly to a park and to run errands when his wife is at home perfectly able (and one would think both willing and insistant!) that he leave the sick child home with her?

 

Also Belinda was shot at very close range. What are the chances that a neighbourhood boy who has broken into the house is going to follow Belinda into her closet and shoot her at close range? Not only close but sounds like the gun was right at the back of her head. I wonder if David used something as a silencer? But if it is a neighbourhood kid there not likely she would have her back to him in the first place - but she would to her husband that she has no idea is about to kill her.

 

I think I am going to read the book Shattered. Apparently there is a history of 'cruelty, domination, infidelity and rage' with regards to David and their marriage. Belinda's parents always thought David killed her and they pushed get an arrest. David also never let them see their grandson after Belinda was murdered. When he was convicted the grandfather hoped they would be allowed to start seeing Evan but I don't know if that ever happened.

Edited March 18, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[starri]

If he was so obviously guilty, why couldn't Siegler convict him without having her thumb on the scale?

[LittleIggy]

I think the FBI guy (the ETHICS instructor!) got away with murder. Maybe I've watched too much TV, but aren't FBI agents trained to physically disarm or subdue someone?

[psychoticstate]

I agree, LittleIggy.

 

I've seen this case before so maybe Dateline covered it?  But my feelings are the same.

 

The husband is guilty.  Estranged wife, told the friend/neighbor in New Mexico that he was going to lure her to Virginia so there wouldn't necessarily be the 50/50 split and the affair with the blonde bimbo.  Why would the wife be in the house?  She seemed to be moving forward.  Why shoot her FOUR times?  Even if she were coming after the husband with the knife, one shot should have disabled her.  I also noticed that the four shots were all grouped very close together, which makes me think she wasn't moving at the time.   The testimony about the one bullet impacting something hard, like the floor, made sense to me. The husband couldn't explain why, with the retching sounds, no vomit was found at the scene or on him or why, despite claiming he gave his wife - - shot four times - - CPR, he did not have blood on his hands or on his pristine white shirt.  And why the surveillance video earlier that day showed him without his holster, yet we are supposed to believe that once he got home, in his own house, he would holster up . . . just in time to "protect" himself from his "crazy" wife?  Please.

[ToukieSmith]

If he was so obviously guilty, why couldn't Siegler convict him without having her thumb on the scale?

 

I have never seen an interview with the Temple jurors.  It would be interesting to hear why they voted guilty.

 

 

I think I am going to read the book Shattered. Apparently there is a history of 'cruelty, domination, infidelity and rage' with regards to David and their marriage.

 

I highly recommend the audiobook.  It was so engaging that it made my 45 minute commute fly by.

Edited March 22, 2016 by ToukieSmith

[starri]

I have never seen an interview with the Temple jurors.  It would be interesting to hear why they voted guilty.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter.  He may absolutely have killed his wife, and the jury may absolutely have convicted him based solely on the legitimate evidence of his guilt.  But Siegler invalidated all of that by deciding to play dirty pool.

 

What really depresses me is the knowledge that Texas will be more likely to vacate the conviction based on the fact that he's white.

 

I will support any episode that features Marcella Fierro.  I adore her.

[hoosiermom]

I just watched the episode about the FBI agent killing his wife. If he lied about doing CPR, in my mind he lied about everything. I noticed his tie flapping in the wind after they arrested him and it would have been dripping with blood if he had even attempted CPR. Shooting her 4 times was just insane. Couldn't she have gotten gun powder residue on her hands when he planted the knife? I feel bad for his kids and all of her family and friends.

[Ohmo]

NOt sure I saw serious clear absolute evidence, but on a gut feeling... he did it.

 

 

He totally did it, but there's not enough factual evidence for a conviction.  But  my bullshit radar was pinging big time. Vicious mother, money hungry daughter and  a smarmy  wallet {man} with a creepy affect. 

 

Agreed in both cases (I'm behind in my crime TV viewing.)  I wouldn't be able to get to guilty based on that evidence, but my spidey sense was also tingling about Steven, and it was more than thinking he was a creep.  While I don't believe this evidence is strong enough to prove murder, I do think he could be capable of murder.  If you admit that you were psychologically abusive (and he did), in my mind, it's not a great leap to go from that to physical violence.

 

FBI Agent Case: I understand agreeing to a bench trial after two hung juries, but if I were the prosecution, I would have wanted a new judge as well.  If you're going to wipe the slate clean by going to a bench trial, it should have been cleaned all the way.  I also watched this case on Dateline, and my opinion has shifted slightly.  Because of some of the pics and that video clip of Julie, I can buy that she could have been capable of threatening her husband with a knife.  That said, even if everything that the agent said happened actually did, I still think he used excessive force and was indeed culpable for her death.  He should be serving some prison time.  If (as his former boss claimed, and I thought the boss was an ass), the FBI is "the best of the best," they should be able to figure out how to subdue someone without firing four shots at center mass..

Edited March 28, 2016 by Ohmo

[Ohmo]

Re: the Cal Harris case

 

He's going to be tried for a fourth time.

 

Businessman faces murder trial in death of estranged wife, again

Edited March 29, 2016 by Ohmo

[stillhere1900]

I totally believe there should be a limit on how many times an individual can be tried for the same crime. If the DA doesn't get a conviction after two tries, or the verdict is overturned after a couple of times. Then the DA is S-O-L

Edited March 29, 2016 by stillhere1900

[Sims Addict]

Did anyone see the most recent episode about the man convicted of murdering his friend while his girlfriend was with him in the apartment? Rahul Gupta was found guilty of stabbing his best friend 11 times in "a drunken haze." His girlfriend, Taylor, was also allegedly in an alcohol coma and gave rather ambiguous statements to the police. Rahul initially confessed, but then retracted and said Taylor was the killer.

 

I think several things pointed to Rahul being the perpetrator, especially the jailhouse call to his dad where he all but said, "Mark and I got in a fight and I grabbed the knife." I also agreed with the lead detective that although she might not have stabbed him, in many ways Taylor was inadvertently responsible for creating the atmosphere that led to the conflict. ***By the way, if I am going out with my husband to celebrate his birthday with his friends, I would likely invite a few of my own girlfriends as well. The fact that she was the lone sloppy drunk girl in a foursome of sloppy drunk guys was not a good look. 

 

Speaking of looks, someone should tell Rahul's sister that eye shadow transfer is real. I was constantly distracted by the glitter all over her face.

 

Taylor reminded me of Bunny's girlfriend (I can't remember her name) from a few weeks ago. Basically, the final update was that Taylor's gone on with her life, has a new career and moved on. I would think that something so traumatic as being at the scene of a murder (of a close friend no less) and testifying against my boyfriend who is accused of said murder, would lightweight destroy me for a while. But these women just pick up and keep it moving like it's just another day. Weird.

 

Seeing Mark all happy and giddy getting on the elevator knowing what awaited him was chilling.

[CaughtOnTape]

I saw it.

 

I think she did it.  I think she's one cold, calculated bitch.  She was calm and cool on that 911 call while he's losing his shit behind her.  I think Rahul likely passed out and she got into a fight with Mark and stabbed him and then when he woke up he started screaming to call 911.  

 

That one guy saying he didn't trust her is what made me side eye her.

[tobeannounced]

Really enjoyed this episode.  I always find it so much more interesting when it's not the usual suspects/usual victims.  I can see a case being made for either one of them doing it or both, but I really have no idea.  

 

Was anyone else bugged by how Taylor was sitting in her little red shorty shorts during the interrogation?  Her body language was all, "I'm lounging at home watching some Walking Dead."  Maybe she was still drunk.  Don't know if she's guilty, but she's an odd bird.

[ari333]

  Was anyone else bugged by how Taylor was sitting in her little red shorty shorts during the interrogation?  Her body language was all, "I'm lounging at home watching some Walking Dead."  Maybe she was still drunk.  Don't know if she's guilty, but she's an odd bird.

 

 

YES! It bugged me. It's like she was slashing lady bits at the interviewer in those tiny shorts. .

[Ohmo]

Really enjoyed this episode.  I always find it so much more interesting when it's not the usual suspects/usual victims.  I can see a case being made for either one of them doing it or both, but I really have no idea.  

 

Was anyone else bugged by how Taylor was sitting in her little red shorty shorts during the interrogation?  Her body language was all, "I'm lounging at home watching some Walking Dead."  Maybe she was still drunk.  Don't know if she's guilty, but she's an odd bird.

 

I thought it was odd how the prosecutors were so blase about Taylor's hair.  I know she lived there, but Mark just happened to be holding some of her hair when he died?  Things that make you go hmmmmmm...

 

In terms of Ruhar, I thought what he said to his father was pretty damning---that he got into a fight with Mark and held the knife.  His defense team really wanted that video in of the two of them at the station, but if I had been a juror, that wouldn't have really swayed me.  I didn't think there was much info there that shed any light on what really happened.

Edited April 9, 2016 by Ohmo

[LittleIggy]

That poor little boy. The jury got it right about his mother.

[starri]

I hate to be one of the people who judges guilt or innocence based on the suspect's demeanor, but she was so indignant about her conviction.  I have a friend who lost a child tragically, and I can't imagine her reacting any way other than despondent were she in that situation.

 

It takes a certain level of gumption to ponder a malpractice suit over the death of a child you yourself has been convicted of killing.

[txhorns79]

I hate to be one of the people who judges guilt or innocence based on the suspect's demeanor, but she was so indignant about her conviction.  I have a friend who lost a child tragically, and I can't imagine her reacting any way other than despondent were she in that situation.

 

I think she lost me entirely when they asked her about the sodium being found in her child's feeding bags, and she suggested that someone else had put the sodium in the bags.  There was just too much inexplicable behavior on her part.    

Edited April 10, 2016 by txhorns79

[ToukieSmith]

I saw it.

 

I think she did it.  I think she's one cold, calculated bitch.  She was calm and cool on that 911 call while he's losing his shit behind her.  I think Rahul likely passed out and she got into a fight with Mark and stabbed him and then when he woke up he started screaming to call 911.  

 

That one guy saying he didn't trust her is what made me side eye her.

I side-eyed her because she changed her clothes.

 

 

I thought it was odd how the prosecutors were so blase about Taylor's hair.  I know she lived there, but Mark just happened to be holding some of her hair when he died?  Things that make you go hmmmmmm...

This bothered me too.  I am not the best housekeeper either, but I never come up with strands of my own hair when I lay out on the floor to exercise.  Just how did the victim get a hold of her hair?  Was his body found near her hairbrush?

Edited April 10, 2016 by ToukieSmith

[Ohmo]

I think she lost me entirely when they asked her about the sodium being found in her child's feeding bags, and she suggested that someone else had put the sodium in the bags.  There was just too much inexplicable behavior on her part.    

 

I say this as someone with several family members who are dealing with mental illness.  At the point where the mental illness negatively affects or harms another person, then mental illness can't be a reason to not jail someone.  Even moreso when the victim is a child.  It certainly sounds like Lacy had MBP, and Garnett paid for that with his life...a life that he never got to live.  I'm sorry that Lacy has a mental illness, but she has proven herself to be especially dangerous to children.  I'm fine with her being in jail.

 

ETA:

 

This bothered me too.  I am not the best housekeeper either, but I never come up with strands of my own hair when I lay out on the floor to exercise.  Just how did the victim get a hold of her hair?  Was his body found near her hairbrush?

 

Exactly.  You'd have to be a complete slob for there to regularly be enough hair on the floor to hold.  Speaking of holding, you're not going to be holding hair on the floor.  Touching it maybe, but the act of holding it (even a strand) suggests an altercation.  But, as the report said, she's gotten away with it if she did do something.  I'm also not sure why the investigator was so sure they didn't do it together.  Seems entirely possible to me.

Edited April 10, 2016 by Ohmo

[Tdoc72]

I side-eyed her because she changed her clothes.

Me too but not only because she changed clothes but her dress & bra had blood on them. And it wasn't a little splash of blood. The blood had to go through her dress and soak into the bra. I would assume her answer for this would be that she didn't remember.

As I said to a co-worker, this one was a puzzler. I thought there were reasons & evidence for each to be guilty. I'm not sure what I would've done as a juror. I tried googling to see if there was any evidence 48 Hours left out but didn't see anything.

I think he'll eventually get a new trial because of the video tape, although I didn't think it was a bombshell.

The salt mom:

I shouldn't judge on her demeanor but it was so weird. Like sassy and she talked very fast. And I didn't see any tears or even get a sense that she mourned for her child.

I liked how they neighbor said she asked her to get the bags and they quick cut to the mom saying she didn't. They did it again w/another lie that I can't remember. Once again a case of everyone's lying but her.

RIP Garnet. His little life was too short. I will always wonder if it was because he was getting to the point where he might've been able to communicate effectively with a doctor, nurse, or teacher.

[glowlights]

This bothered me too.  I am not the best housekeeper either, but I never come up with strands of my own hair when I lay out on the floor to exercise.  Just how did the victim get a hold of her hair?  Was his body found near her hairbrush?

 

I do. Some people shed a lot more than others. I shed like a golden retriever. So it wasn't surprising to me that her hair was all over the apartment esepcially if they weren't good housekeepers - she just may be a fellow shedder. I gave her the side eye for a lot of other reasons, though. She seemed very calculated, whereas he just seemed drunk. But the conversation with his dad (saying he got in an argument and grabbed the knife) sure was damning. It was a very senseless loss.

 

Regarding Garnet, does anyone know if there is a medical cause for dangerously high sodium besides dehydration or ingesting a boatload of salt? I recall a story from years ago in which a woman was accused of killing her child with Munchausen By Proxy but then the same symptoms happened to another family member and it was discovered her child died of a rare hereditary disorder that had gone undiagnosed. She had already served years in prison before this diagnosis exonerated her - it was horrible. Could Garnet have had a rare imbalance? On the other hand, Garnet's mother's interviews gave me the heebie-jeebies. It all was indignation and anger about her situation but no sadness or sense of loss about her dead child. And all the social media lies about his allegedly dead father...

[starri]

Regarding Garnet, does anyone know if there is a medical cause for dangerously high sodium besides dehydration or ingesting a boatload of salt? I recall a story from years ago in which a woman was accused of killing her child with Munchausen By Proxy but then the same symptoms happened to another family member and it was discovered her child died of a rare hereditary disorder that had gone undiagnosed. She had already served years in prison before this diagnosis exonerated her - it was horrible. Could Garnet have had a rare imbalance? On the other hand, Garnet's mother's interviews gave me the heebie-jeebies. It all was indignation and anger about her situation but no sadness or sense of loss about her dead child. And all the social media lies about his allegedly dead father...

There are certain kinds of diuretics that can cause hypernatremia, but that's also something that wouldn't have just happened.  If he'd had poorly controlled diabetes, that might have been a cause, but clearly that wasn't the case.

[psychoticstate]

Me too but not only because she changed clothes but her dress & bra had blood on them. And it wasn't a little splash of blood. The blood had to go through her dress and soak into the bra. I would assume her answer for this would be that she didn't remember.

As I said to a co-worker, this one was a puzzler. I thought there were reasons & evidence for each to be guilty. I'm not sure what I would've done as a juror. I tried googling to see if there was any evidence 48 Hours left out but didn't see anything.

I think he'll eventually get a new trial because of the video tape, although I didn't think it was a bombshell.

The salt mom:

I shouldn't judge on her demeanor but it was so weird. Like sassy and she talked very fast. And I didn't see any tears or even get a sense that she mourned for her child.

I liked how they neighbor said she asked her to get the bags and they quick cut to the mom saying she didn't. They did it again w/another lie that I can't remember. Once again a case of everyone's lying but her.

RIP Garnet. His little life was too short. I will always wonder if it was because he was getting to the point where he might've been able to communicate effectively with a doctor, nurse, or teacher.

 

The Mark Waugh case disturbed me to no end.  They were in a studio apartment - - how could either Rahul or Taylor kill Mark without the other knowing?  I just don't buy it.  

 

I watched the elevator footage and noted that Taylor got into the elevator and immediately moved to her left, toward Mark, with Rahul in front of her.  I think that says a lot.  Either there was something going on with Mark or she was trying to create something.  The fourth friend stated Taylor had propositioned him, which I believe.  He left prior to this.  Mark was accompanying them back to their apartment . . . why?  In my opinion, maybe to wait for Rahul to pass out so that he and Taylor could hook up.  

 

Taylor's affect bothered me greatly.  I don't care how drunk you are, she didn't appear to be that bothered or upset by what happened to Mark.  I would have been hysterical, not just that my friend was killed but also killed on my floor.  And that his blood was on my legs, my hands and my clothing.  I had my days back in my twenties where I went out and did more than my fair share of drinking.  I NEVER got so drunk that I didn't remember what happened.  

 

I think Taylor's hair in Mark's hand was interesting.  I don't buy that it came off the floor.  I think it either came from her head because they were making out (and Rahul caught them) or Mark grabbed it when Taylor attacked him.  I also wanted to know how her hair was stuck to the wall with Mark's blood.

 

The whole thing was off.  And Taylor going on with her life like nothing . . . just wow.  She is reminiscent of Jennifer (with Bunny from an earlier episode.) 

 

I absolutely thought Lacy had/has MBP.  Letting other people think your friend/neighbor's kid is yours?  Creepy.  And the NY neighbor had no reason to lie about Lacy asking her to throw out that bag.  Why would you even be thinking about that while your child is dying or had just died?  It reeked of guilt.  It also seemed like Garnet could eat just fine when his mother wasn't there or when she deemed it was okay for him to eat.  

 

I'm sorry to say that I spent part of the episode wondering why on earth Lacy didn't cut his hair or at least get the hair out of his face.

[ari333]

The elevator footage and outside the apt was odd to me too

[/taylor]

[starri]

I'm sorry to say that I spent part of the episode wondering why on earth Lacy didn't cut his hair or at least get the hair out of his face.

Honestly, I thought more than once that she might have wished he was a girl.