Melanie McGuire: Defense Appeal Misfires!

[bugsy]

Is filed.

Read it. I think it speaks for itself.

I have nothing to add as of now.

[annalyzer]

Melanie McGuire appeals conviction in husband's murder

By RICK MALWITZ • GANNETT NEW JERSEY
• June 8, 2009

The lawyer for convicted murderer Melanie McGuire of Brick has filed motions with the Appellate Division of Superior Court, including a request for an "overlength brief" and a motion to "supplement the record."

The motions were filed Monday, the day McGuire was scheduled to file an appeal brief, seeking to have her guilty verdict overturned.

In 2007, a Middlesex County jury found McGuire guilty of the murder and dismemberment of her husband, William T. McGuire, whose remains were found in May 2004 in three suitcases found near the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel in Virginia.

The request for an "overlength brief" seeks permission to go beyond the court's 25-page limit on an appeal brief. The request to "supplement the record" seeks permission to introduce material not presented at the original trial.

The state has 10 days to respond to the motions, according to a court spokesman.

The motions were filed by Jamie S. Kilberg, an attorney with Baker Botts of Washington, D.C., who is representing McGuire during he appeal.

Once the appeal is filed, the state has 30 days to file a reply brief. The case has been assigned to Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bornstein.

Arguments would be heard by the Appellate Division of Superior Court.

McGuire, now 36, was found guilty April 23, 2007, ending the most sensational murder trial in Middlesex County in the era of the new media, drawing the attention of newspapers, television news magazines, the Internet and Court TV.

McGuire is serving her sentence at the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in Union Township, Hunterdon County.

Attorney Stephen Turano, who represented McGuire at the 2007 trial, said she hopeful that her appeal of the verdict will be successful.

"She would love a new trial," Turano said.

During the trial, the jury was told that William McGuire was killed at the Woodbridge apartment within hours of the McGuires' closing on a new home in Warren County on April 28, 2004. Melanie McGuire lived on Constitution Drive in Brick until her conviction.

Following the verdict, a motion was filed with Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa in New Brunswick, seeking a new trial or a mistrial.

The motion questioned the jurisdiction of the state of New Jersey to try the case, since there was no direct evidence the murder occurred in New Jersey.

The motion also questioned the indictment charging McGuire with being an accomplice, without having charged anyone else with a role on the murder.

The motion also cited the fact that members of the jury admitted to reading Internet blogs during the trial, violating the judge's instructions to avoid all media coverage.

The motion was denied by DeVesa, the trial judge, who sentenced McGuire to life in prison for the murder and related charges.

It is not known what elements of the motions for a new trial are included in the appeal brief.

http://www.app.com/article/20090608/NEWS/90608135/1001/rss

[4Life]

If you read the above post by Anna, the motions were filed today not the appeal

[bugsy]

If you read the above post by Anna, the motions were filed today not the appeal

When I used the term "appeal" above, I mean the appellate brief. I assumed that was understood.

Sorry.

[Len]

Melanie McGuire appeals conviction in husband's murder

By RICK MALWITZ • GANNETT NEW JERSEY
• June 8, 2009

The lawyer for convicted murderer Melanie McGuire of Brick has filed motions with the Appellate Division of Superior Court, including a request for an "overlength brief" and a motion to "supplement the record."

The motions were filed Monday, the day McGuire was scheduled to file an appeal brief, seeking to have her guilty verdict overturned.

In 2007, a Middlesex County jury found McGuire guilty of the murder and dismemberment of her husband, William T. McGuire, whose remains were found in May 2004 in three suitcases found near the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel in Virginia.

The request for an "overlength brief" seeks permission to go beyond the court's 25-page limit on an appeal brief. The request to "supplement the record" seeks permission to introduce material not presented at the original trial.

The state has 10 days to respond to the motions, according to a court spokesman.

The motions were filed by Jamie S. Kilberg, an attorney with Baker Botts of Washington, D.C., who is representing McGuire during he appeal.

Once the appeal is filed, the state has 30 days to file a reply brief. The case has been assigned to Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bornstein.

Arguments would be heard by the Appellate Division of Superior Court.

McGuire, now 36, was found guilty April 23, 2007, ending the most sensational murder trial in Middlesex County in the era of the new media, drawing the attention of newspapers, television news magazines, the Internet and Court TV.

McGuire is serving her sentence at the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in Union Township, Hunterdon County.

Attorney Stephen Turano, who represented McGuire at the 2007 trial, said she hopeful that her appeal of the verdict will be successful.

"She would love a new trial," Turano said.

During the trial, the jury was told that William McGuire was killed at the Woodbridge apartment within hours of the McGuires' closing on a new home in Warren County on April 28, 2004. Melanie McGuire lived on Constitution Drive in Brick until her conviction.

Following the verdict, a motion was filed with Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa in New Brunswick, seeking a new trial or a mistrial.

The motion questioned the jurisdiction of the state of New Jersey to try the case, since there was no direct evidence the murder occurred in New Jersey.

The motion also questioned the indictment charging McGuire with being an accomplice, without having charged anyone else with a role on the murder.

The motion also cited the fact that members of the jury admitted to reading Internet blogs during the trial, violating the judge's instructions to avoid all media coverage.

The motion was denied by DeVesa, the trial judge, who sentenced McGuire to life in prison for the murder and related charges.

It is not known what elements of the motions for a new trial are included in the appeal brief.

http://www.app.com/article/20090608/NEWS/90608135/1001/rss


That's very interesting news about the whole case. It will be very interesting to see what the new evidence in the motion to "supplement the record" is.

I think the issue of jurisdiction may be the most powerful anyway. There was absolutely no evidence to suggest that the murder happened in NJ. The argument of the prosecution that the "hair stubble" DNA from the luggage was "evidence from the bathroom" and therefore consistent with the murder occurring in NJ was very weak and IMO does not really stand. DNA evidence using PCR (as I assume they did) could amplify very weak signals and in a case where whole DNA was extracted from the stubble could be simply contamination, as the luggage was used by both MM and the victim.

[4Life]

That's very interesting news about the whole case. It will be very interesting to see what the new evidence in the motion to "supplement the record" is.

I think the issue of jurisdiction may be the most powerful anyway. There was absolutely no evidence to suggest that the murder happened in NJ. The argument of the prosecution that the "hair stubble" DNA from the luggage was "evidence from the bathroom" and therefore consistent with the murder occurring in NJ was very weak and IMO does not really stand. DNA evidence using PCR (as I assume they did) could amplify very weak signals and in a case where whole DNA was extracted from the stubble could be simply contamination, as the luggage was used by both MM and the victim.

No evidence to prove it happened in NJ?

Scripts wrote in NJ
MM bought the gun back to NJ
WM last seen in NJ
MM was last person in WM car in NJ
Trash bags from NJ im MMs house and her parents house
etc...

[bugsy]

No evidence to prove it happened in NJ?

Scripts wrote in NJ
MM bought the gun back to NJ
WM last seen in NJ
MM was last person in WM car in NJ
Trash bags from NJ im MMs house and her parents house
etc...

Read the appeal, then make a decision.

[4Life]

Read the appeal, then make a decision.

It is funny how you are telling people to read it when only a few people have access to it and it has not been filed yet. Itr is going to be at least 11 days before it is filed. The State has 10 days to answers these motions filed today, once that is over, the appeal will be filed.

They actually think the appeals court is going to allow her lawyers to enter "new evidence" into the appeal? Very Very unlikely that will happen

[annalyzer]

From link above, "The motions were filed Monday, the day McGuire was scheduled to file an appeal brief, seeking to have her guilty verdict overturned."

So did she file the appeal today?

[4Life]

From link above, "The motions were filed Monday, the day McGuire was scheduled to file an appeal brief, seeking to have her guilty verdict overturned."

So did she file the appeal today?

No, just the motions


The State has 10 days to respond to that and after the appeal is filed the State has 30 days to respond

Her lawyers are trying to ask the court to allow new evidence to be submitted into the appeal. IMO that won't happen

I think the title of this thread needs to be changed

[Len]

From the link below:

The motion also cited the fact that members of the jury admitted to reading Internet blogs during the trial, violating the judge's instructions to avoid all media coverage.

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090608/NEWS/906080374



That sounds like a pretty compelling issue. I did not know that some of the jurors had admitted openly that thy were reading internet blogs, as it is quoted in that story.

[Topaz]

From the link below:

The motion also cited the fact that members of the jury admitted to reading Internet blogs during the trial, violating the judge's instructions to avoid all media coverage.

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090608/NEWS/906080374



That sounds like a pretty compelling issue. I did not know that some of the jurors had admitted openly that thy were reading internet blogs, as it is quoted in that story.

Perhaps they weren't. Everything connected to this trial is filled with
confusing lies from the defense...this could just be more of the same.

[Len]

Perhaps they weren't. Everything connected to this trial is filled with
confusing lies from the defense...this could just be more of the same.

I am not sure you are correct. My impression of the trial was that it was filled by exaggerations and over-interpretation of the evidence by the prosecution (like the proposed use of CH, etc.). But there must be records on whether any jurors read blogs. That's a huge issue if true and should certainly be a basis for a new trial.

[Len]

http://www.trentonian.com/articles/2009/06/09/news/doc4a2dfe095b5c6707337084.txt

From the link above:
Attorney Jamie S. Kilberg is seeking permission to file an “overlength brief” and another seeking to supplement the trial record with additional material. He filed the motions with the state Superior Court’s Appellate Division on Monday. The state has 10 days to respond.

That would be very interesting to see what it is. I am wondering what could be the additional material to supplement the record.

[bugsy]

It is funny how you are telling people to read it when only a few people have access to it and it has not been filed yet. Itr is going to be at least 11 days before it is filed. The State has 10 days to answers these motions filed today, once that is over, the appeal will be filed.

They actually think the appeals court is going to allow her lawyers to enter "new evidence" into the appeal? Very Very unlikely that will happen

The actual appellate brief was filed yesterday. It most likely went in at the end of the day.

Therefore, by the time news outlets acquired copies of it, and digested it (there's a lot to it), they probably missed the deadlines for last nights round of news.

[observer]

McGuire appeal: Defense claims bullets that killed husband were from different gun
By RICK MALWITZ • STAFF WRITER • June 9, 2009

MIDDLESEX COUNTY — The bullets that killed William McGuire did not come from the gun purchased by his wife, Melanie McGuire, according to a brief filed on her behalf with the Appellate Division of state Superior Court.



Based on its investigation of "publicly available material,'' the appeal asserts, "... the pistol purchased by Melanie McGuire could not have been the murder weapon.''

The argument is based on bullet markings that the defense contends could not have come from the gun McGuire purchased several days before her husband's slaying.

On April 23, 2007, a Middlesex County jury found McGuire guilty of the murder and dismemberment of her husband, after hearing testimony that her husband was shot and killed at their Woodbridge apartment on April 29, 2004.

RELATED
Melanie McGuire's attorney appeals conviction in husband's brutal Woodbridge murder
The jury was told the cause of death was wounds from two bullets shot from a .38-caliber Taurus gun Melanie McGuire had purchased in Pennsylvania.

William McGuire's severed remains were found in three suitcases found near the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel in May of 2004.

The defense contends that the gun, "Could not have been the murder weapon. Unlike the gun that fired the bullets found in Mr. McGuire's body, the gun Ms. McGuire purchased has five lands and grooves, not six.''

Lands and grooves are distinctive markings a bullet makes when it is fired from a gun.

The defense is basing its findings on information available on the Taurus Web site. It allows a computer user to input a serial number and retrieve information about the gun.

"Everything they're basing their findings on -- none of this is new information. Everybody had access to this information,'' said attorney Patricia Prezioso, the lead prosecutor for the state.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

It was information also available to the media and to the countless followers of a trial that received wide publicity, and blanket coverage from Court TV.

(2 of 2)


Prezioso said there would be no doubt about the source of the bullets that caused the death of McGuire, if the gun was located.



"The only was to prove the number of lands and grooves is to test the gun,'' said Prezioso, who now works in private law practice.

The location of the gun remains a mystery.

McGuire told investigators she put the gun in a lockbox, but when investigators located her lockbox, the gun was not found.

RELATED
Melanie McGuire's attorney appeals conviction in husband's brutal Woodbridge murder
McGuire, who did not testify at the 2007 trial, is serving a life sentence at the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in Union Township, Hunterdon County.

The appeal, filed by attorney Jamie Kilburg of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Baker Botts, included additional arguments, questioning the reliability of the state's expert witnesses and the incidents that tainted the jury.

It also repeated arguments at trial -- that there was no direct evidence that a murder took place at the Woodbridge apartment.

The appeal also questioned elements of the sentencing, including Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa's decision to enhance the sentence because the crime "was committed in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved matter.''

The appeal asserted, "To aggravate the murder charge, the court had to find that the murder itself was heinous, atrocious and cruel -- not that the separately charged post-conduct was.''

The state has 30 days to respond to the defense brief. The case has been assigned to Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bornstein.

Rmalwitz@mycentraljersey.com, 732-565-7291.

[Len]

Observer,
That's huge news. If it stands, it changes completely the case and proves that Melanie McGuire is absolutely innocent. I am not surprised. All along I had major doubts on whether she was guilty

[annalyzer]

I have no doubt she is guilty. Produce the gun then say it doesn't match.

[observer]

Observer,
That's huge news. If it stands, it changes completely the case and proves that Melanie McGuire is absolutely innocent. I am not surprised. All along I had major doubts on whether she was guilty

This is wonderful news Len. Did you read what PP says....she missed this information although it was available to all.....sure she missed it...she missed revealing it because her case would have been lost. For all non believers, I'm not sure how producing the gun would change this. Why is each gun, although same style etc. different?????? I don't think so. I always believed that she should have been found not guilty/BARD...this is so great!!!!!

[annalyzer]

McGuire appeal: Defense claims bullets that killed husband were from different gun
By RICK MALWITZ • STAFF WRITER • June 9, 2009

MIDDLESEX COUNTY — The bullets that killed William McGuire did not come from the gun purchased by his wife, Melanie McGuire, according to a brief filed on her behalf with the Appellate Division of state Superior Court.



Based on its investigation of "publicly available material,'' the appeal asserts, "... the pistol purchased by Melanie McGuire could not have been the murder weapon.''

The argument is based on bullet markings that the defense contends could not have come from the gun McGuire purchased several days before her husband's slaying.

On April 23, 2007, a Middlesex County jury found McGuire guilty of the murder and dismemberment of her husband, after hearing testimony that her husband was shot and killed at their Woodbridge apartment on April 29, 2004.

RELATED
Melanie McGuire's attorney appeals conviction in husband's brutal Woodbridge murder
The jury was told the cause of death was wounds from two bullets shot from a .38-caliber Taurus gun Melanie McGuire had purchased in Pennsylvania.

William McGuire's severed remains were found in three suitcases found near the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel in May of 2004.

The defense contends that the gun, "Could not have been the murder weapon. Unlike the gun that fired the bullets found in Mr. McGuire's body, the gun Ms. McGuire purchased has five lands and grooves, not six.''

Lands and grooves are distinctive markings a bullet makes when it is fired from a gun.

The defense is basing its findings on information available on the Taurus Web site. It allows a computer user to input a serial number and retrieve information about the gun.

"Everything they're basing their findings on -- none of this is new information. Everybody had access to this information,'' said attorney Patricia Prezioso, the lead prosecutor for the state.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

It was information also available to the media and to the countless followers of a trial that received wide publicity, and blanket coverage from Court TV.

(2 of 2)


Prezioso said there would be no doubt about the source of the bullets that caused the death of McGuire, if the gun was located.



"The only was to prove the number of lands and grooves is to test the gun,'' said Prezioso, who now works in private law practice.

The location of the gun remains a mystery.

McGuire told investigators she put the gun in a lockbox, but when investigators located her lockbox, the gun was not found.

RELATED
Melanie McGuire's attorney appeals conviction in husband's brutal Woodbridge murder
McGuire, who did not testify at the 2007 trial, is serving a life sentence at the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in Union Township, Hunterdon County.

The appeal, filed by attorney Jamie Kilburg of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Baker Botts, included additional arguments, questioning the reliability of the state's expert witnesses and the incidents that tainted the jury.

It also repeated arguments at trial -- that there was no direct evidence that a murder took place at the Woodbridge apartment.

The appeal also questioned elements of the sentencing, including Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa's decision to enhance the sentence because the crime "was committed in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved matter.''

The appeal asserted, "To aggravate the murder charge, the court had to find that the murder itself was heinous, atrocious and cruel -- not that the separately charged post-conduct was.''

The state has 30 days to respond to the defense brief. The case has been assigned to Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bornstein.

Rmalwitz@mycentraljersey.com, 732-565-7291.

Where is the link to this story?

found it http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090609/NEWS/90609018/McGuire+appeal++Defense+claims+bullets+that+killed +husband+were+from+different+gun

[observer]

Are you serious....I made the article up....just go to Yahoo and search Melanie Mcquire appeal and you will find it.

[Len]

This is wonderful news Len. Did you read what PP says....she missed this information although it was available to all.....sure she missed it...she missed revealing it because her case would have been lost. For all non believers, I'm not sure how producing the gun would change this. Why is each gun, although same style etc. different?????? I don't think so. I always believed that she should have been found not guilty/BARD...this is so great!!!!!

I think this is huge. It essentially proves she is innocent. They should grant a new trial, especially if now, based on that article, PP said that both prosecution and defense had missed it during the trial.

[annalyzer]

Are you serious....I made the article up....just go to Yahoo and search Melanie Mcquire appeal and you will find it.

yes I'm serious. All articles require links. you should thank me for providing the link instead of reporting your post.

[observer]

I think this is huge. It essentially proves she is innocent. They should grant a new trial, especially if now, based on that article, PP said that both prosecution and defense had missed it during the trial.

She even had the nerve to say Court TV boards (where the case was discussed extensively)missed it as well...........can you believe her stupidity for even saying that.

[annalyzer]

She even had the nerve to say Court TV boards (where the case was discussed extensively)missed it as well...........can you believe her stupidity for even saying that.

she said trial coverage by Court TV, she did not mention ctv boards.

[annalyzer]

She even had the nerve to say Court TV boards (where the case was discussed extensively)missed it as well...........can you believe her stupidity for even saying that.

Get your facts straight before calling someone else stupid.

From above link, "This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

It was information also available to the media and to the countless followers of a trial that received wide publicity, and blanket coverage from Court TV. (end excerpt)

Prezioso is not quoted as saying the second sentence. It was likely added in from the writer of the news story.

[observer]

I'm not an expert so maybe someone could help me out. I wonder why PP states if they need the gun to prove the theory. Wouldn't they just need a the same model gun????? Wouldn't all guns of the same model by the same manufacturer have the same number of grooves?

If so, how was this missed. Someone even testified to the number of grooves in the bullets found.

[Len]

But in this article it seems that both prosecution and defense misssed that info. Without gun the case does not stand. I am starting to believe that MM is innocent.

[Roux]

I'm not an expert so maybe someone could help me out. I wonder why PP states if they need the gun to prove the theory. Wouldn't they just need a the same model gun????? Wouldn't all guns of the same model by the same manufacturer have the same number of grooves?

If so, how was this missed. Someone even testified to the number of grooves in the bullets found.

I'd like to have Mort Snerd's take on this. I respect and value his opinions and knowledge of firearms.

Unless the gun that Melanie purchased was actually test fired for comparison, I would not discount it as the murder weapon. I think she tossed the gun in the bay along with Bill's remains so it can never be tested.

[observer]

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06


New JerseyConvicted suitcase killer Melanie McGuire seeks another trial
by Sue Epstein/The Star-Ledger Tuesday June 09, 2009, 12:05 PM
Attorneys for convicted suitcase killer Melanie McGuire said a gun purchased before her husband was killed could not have been the murder weapon and this evidence demands another trial.

McGuire was sentenced in July 2007 to a life prison term.
During her trial, prosecutors successfully argued McGuire drugged, shot and dismembered her husband before stuffing his remains in three suitcases that were dumped in the Chesapeake Bay.


In a motion filed Monday with the appellate court clerk, attorney Stephen Turano, McGuire's attorney of record, said information from the website of the weapon's manufacturer proved "the number of lands and grooves machined into the model gun Ms. McGuire purchased is inconsistent with the markings on the bullets described by the state's own experts."

Turano said her purchase of the weapon and the testimony showing it was consistent with the bullets found in her husband's body were crucial to the jury's convicting her of murder. The motion asked the appellate court to send the case back to Superior Court Judge Frederick De Vesa to consider the evidence.

The attorney also filed a motion asking the appellate panel for permission to file an extended brief in the case.

The state Attorney General's Office, which prosecuted McGuire, has 10 days to file answers to the motions filed by Turano.

Prosecutors said McGuire killed the computer programmer in 2004 so she could be with her lover, Bradley Miller, a doctor who worked with her at a fertility clinic in Morristown.

Testimony during the trial in 2007 revealed the gun used to kill William McGuire was never found, but ballistic experts for the state used the two bullets from his body and compared them to the gun Melanie McGuire purchased in Pennsylvania.

[observer]

But in this article it seems that both prosecution and defense misssed that info. Without gun the case does not stand. I am starting to believe that MM is innocent.

I can't believe they missed this...I don't believe PP missed it....what else can she say now? This is wonderful.....:thumbup:

[clannad]

I'm not an expert so maybe someone could help me out. I wonder why PP states if they need the gun to prove the theory. Wouldn't they just need a the same model gun????? Wouldn't all guns of the same model by the same manufacturer have the same number of grooves?

If so, how was this missed. Someone even testified to the number of grooves in the bullets found.

Even though the same model of gun will have the same lands and grooves, each gun will have different striations and twists, which will be unique to that particular gun.

(scroll down to Bullet Individual Characteristics)

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:vFl51DDVoQYJ:www.bcps.org/offices/science/secondary/forensic/Firearms%2520and%2520Ballistics.pdf+lands+grooves+ striations+and+twists+in+gun+barrel&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

[observer]

I'd like to have Mort Snerd's take on this. I respect and value his opinions and knowledge of firearms.

Unless the gun that Melanie purchased was actually test fired for comparison, I would not discount it as the murder weapon. I think she tossed the gun in the bay along with Bill's remains so it can never be tested.

This is where reasonable doubt enters...as I said I am not an expert, but why would you need her gun, why not a gun of the same model???? The grooves aren't put in the gun by hand, a machine must do it...to say her gun had 5 grooves vs. 6 grooves that the model gun is made with is far fetched...wouldn't you say?

[observer]

Even though the same model of gun will have the same lands and grooves, each gun will have different striations and twists, which will be unique to that particular gun.

(scroll down to Bullet Individual Characteristics)

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:vFl51DDVoQYJ:www.bcps.org/offices/science/secondary/forensic/Firearms%2520and%2520Ballistics.pdf+lands+grooves+ striations+and+twists+in+gun+barrel&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


But they are not questioning striations and twists...they are countering grooves which is not unique to that particular gun....I could be wrong

[Roux]

Even though the same model of gun will have the same lands and grooves, each gun will have different striations and twists, which will be unique to that particular gun.

(scroll down to Bullet Individual Characteristics)

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:vFl51DDVoQYJ:www.bcps.org/offices/science/secondary/forensic/Firearms%2520and%2520Ballistics.pdf+lands+grooves+ striations+and+twists+in+gun+barrel&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Thank you for the info. I thought this might be the case but was afraid to state my opinion because of my ignorance of guns.

[Roux]

This is where reasonable doubt enters...as I said I am not an expert, but why would you need her gun, why not a gun of the same model???? The grooves aren't put in the gun by hand, a machine must do it...to say her gun had 5 grooves vs. 6 grooves that the model gun is made with is far fetched...wouldn't you say?

From watching Forensic Files, etc. I thought that each gun was unique but I get what you're saying about the model's "grooves."

For me, I do not have reasonable doubt as to MM's guilt. There is simply too much evidence and even should she be granted a new trial, I think the conclusion would be the same.

[observer]

I've read the attachment and still come away witht the question about grooves.....I understand that each barrell makes different markings due to striations etc. but grooves are consistent within models and a barrell with 5 grooves can't produce a bullet with 6 grooves....am I missing something?

[clannad]

I understand what you're saying Observer. They are just looking at lands and grooves at this time and not striations and twists.

My link was to show that even though guns may be the same model, they would be able to tell which gun fired a particular bullet if they had a specific gun to test.

Here is another link on bullet info

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-can-a-bullet-be-trace

[clannad]

You're welcome, Roux.
No, I don't think you're missing it, Observer. I'm finding myself a little confused as well about the lands and grooves.
(my husband used to be the firearms instructor at our County Police Academy many years ago. When he gets home from work, I'll ask him about the lands and grooves not matching up on the same model of gun to see what he thinks)

[observer]

From watching Forensic Files, etc. I thought that each gun was unique but I get what you're saying about the model's "grooves."

For me, I do not have reasonable doubt as to MM's guilt. There is simply too much evidence and even should she be granted a new trial, I think the conclusion would be the same.

I always believe she should have been found not guilty/BARD.

I also agree that each bullet is unique so as to speak to the gun it is fired from, but that is due to things including striations, etc. Grooves is something different and I remember seeing maybe on t.v. or the net the inside of a barrell of gun and it has grooves. So if the model MM bought is made with 5 grooves it can't possibly shoot a bullet with 6 grooves and if it had 6 grooves it can't produce a bullet with 5 grooves evenly spaced apart. Yes, I agree finding her gun would be the best evidence, but not all cases are proven disproven with the actual weapon..if that were the case there would be many unsolved cases out there as weapons are not always found. That is why there are experts, and in this case the expert failed to bring forth this information. Don't know why, maybe because he wasn't asked. I would also think that B&B knows what they are doing and have greatly researched this issue.

I am hoping as we all are who believe MM was mistakenly found guilty.

[observer]

From watching Forensic Files, etc. I thought that each gun was unique but I get what you're saying about the model's "grooves."

For me, I do not have reasonable doubt as to MM's guilt. There is simply too much evidence and even should she be granted a new trial, I think the conclusion would be the same.

Don't get me wrong though, when I say I believe MM should have been found not guilty/BARD, I am not saying she is innocent....but our justice system states that you must find the defendant guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, if you have any doubt based on reason, you must find the defendant not guilty...I may not have stated it accurately and if so I apologize, so hence I believe the jury got it wrong. I also believed the jury was so prejudiced that had this been brought out at the trial the jury would have probably overlooked it, so maybe it is better that it is being brought out now.

[Len]

But they are not questioning striations and twists...they are countering grooves which is not unique to that particular gun....I could be wrong

This new finding is essentially a proof that the gun that MM bought was not used. I think she is innocent.

[Pinwheel]

the difference between 5 lands and grooves patterns and 6 lands and grooves patterns is not an issue of striations. striations are more like fingerprints and can vary within the same make and model of gun. but the number of grooves in a gun barrell can'td be faked on a projectile. Im gonna chekc it out for you and pass info along....know some gun freaks.....:laugh:

[observer]

the difference between 5 lands and grooves patterns and 6 lands and grooves patterns is not an issue of striations. striations are more like fingerprints and can vary within the same make and model of gun. but the number of grooves in a gun barrell can'td be faked on a projectile. Im gonna chekc it out for you and pass info along....know some gun freaks.....:laugh:


I kind of figured that as well....they are grooves that are drilled into the barrell and just think of a bullet being project out of the barrell...how could a 5 groove barrell produce an extra groove in the bullet??? I think B&B knows what they are talking about.

I look forward to your reply.

[observer]

This new finding is essentially a proof that the gun that MM bought was not used. I think she is innocent.

Len, this could sway me into thinking that she is completely innocent as well....I always had doubt she was innnocent but absolutely no doubt that she was wrongly found not guilty.

I worry though that even if she is granted a new trial will she get a jury who is not prejudiced.....???? Look at the hate on this bb alone because she had an affair when she was 8 months pregnant....will the next jury be just as deaf to the reasonable doubts raised by the defense.....

[4Life]

I'm not an expert so maybe someone could help me out. I wonder why PP states if they need the gun to prove the theory. Wouldn't they just need a the same model gun????? Wouldn't all guns of the same model by the same manufacturer have the same number of grooves?

If so, how was this missed. Someone even testified to the number of grooves in the bullets found.

No you would need the exact gun used to determine if the bullets came from that gun. Each gun leaves different markings even if it is the same model

[annalyzer]

the difference between 5 lands and grooves patterns and 6 lands and grooves patterns is not an issue of striations. striations are more like fingerprints and can vary within the same make and model of gun. but the number of grooves in a gun barrell can'td be faked on a projectile. Im gonna chekc it out for you and pass info along....know some gun freaks.....:laugh:


Hi Pinwheel. I wonder if this turns out to be true, and I doubt it, why didn't the defense bring this up at trial? Surely they looked into it then?

[4Life]

This new finding is essentially a proof that the gun that MM bought was not used. I think she is innocent.

Wrong, you need the exact gun used to determine that. MM tossed it

[annalyzer]

Len, this could sway me into thinking that she is completely innocent as well....I always had doubt she was innnocent but absolutely no doubt that she was wrongly found not guilty.

I worry though that even if she is granted a new trial will she get a jury who is not prejudiced.....???? Look at the hate on this bb alone because she had an affair when she was 8 months pregnant....will the next jury be just as deaf to the reasonable doubts raised by the defense.....


An affair is forgiveable but only goes to her character. It's the murder and disposal of her poor husband and children's father that people hate.

[observer]

No you would need the exact gun used to determine if the bullets came from that gun. Each gun leaves different markings even if it is the same model

If that is the case I guess then we need to get rid of all the experts, and then throw out all of the convictions that were based on expert's testimonies because the actual guns were not found.............if I recall, a lot of discussion on this bb was based on the testimony of gun experts and that there was no doubt based on these testimonies that the gun MM purchased was in fact the gun that killed MM.....now I'm really confused because I don't recall the gun being produced into evidence at the trial so not sure if we couldn't test it then how the prosecution came to the conclusion that MM's gun did in fact kill WM and why we now need the gun to prove it was?????:confused:

[bugsy]

No you would need the exact gun used to determine if the bullets came from that gun. Each gun leaves different markings even if it is the same model

Then the state could not have said during the trial they matched the gun and bullets, could they?

[Pinwheel]

Wrong, you need the exact gun used to determine that. MM tossed it

just asked a friend that is a gun enthusiast-that's hwat he likes to call himself I just say gun freak-he says the number of grooves is that comes form the manufacturer and its not up for grabs. if a 38 is made with 5 grooves thats what all the models that match are made with. if it is made with 6 grooves same thing. the number doesnt vary from gun to gun if thier all the same model. but he thinks that they make so many different kinds of 38s that you can't say that all 38s have the same number of grooves. the model of the gun makes a big difference.

but that's just what they call 'hearsay' I guess. I will look on the web though.

[observer]

Then the state could not have said during the trial they matched the gun and bullets, could they?

See my response as well to this....sure it was okay then, but now it's not okay, now we need the actual gun......discussion on this bb was so certain that it was her gun that killed Wm..............................can't have it both ways, although the g's would like to.

[annalyzer]

Pathologist testifies that gunshots were cause of death
Bullets consistent with type of gun Melanie McGuire allegedly purchased

BY KATHY CHANG
Staff Writer

Forensic Pathologist Wendy Gunther, who conducted the autopsy on William McGuire in Virginia, said that it was likely that he was shot as many as four times.

"The gunshots through his head and chest are the only parts of the case that are easy," said Gunther, who said either shot would have killed him. "The gunshots that went through his forehead and chest had clear exit wounds."

Gunther said the two bullets found during the autopsy are not believed to be the bullets that killed McGuire.

His wife, Melanie McGuire, 34, a former fertility nurse, is accused of killing him in their Woodbridge Center Plaza Apartment and later dismembering his body, more than two years ago. McGuire, who resides in Brick Township, has pleaded not guilty to the charges against her and remains free on $2.1 million bail

Gunther, who pointed to her forehead to demonstrate to the jury where the bullet entered McGuire's head and where it exited, said that McGuire was alive when the gunshots went through his head and through his chest.

"He was cut long after his death, because the cuts had no blood," she said. "If a cut is made after the body is dead, it doesn't bleed … ."

Gunther said the second bullet, which was found deep inside his body, was frustrating because she could not find where it came from.

"It's so peculiar because it was found with massive fibers around it," she said. "It reminded me of bullets I've seen that have gone through couches or upholstery, but without his clothing, I don't know the whole picture."

During direct examination, Gunther said the second bullet could possibly be a "short return," referring to when a bullet partially exits the body but then goes back in.

"This is rare," she said. "Over the 12 to 13 years that I have been a forensic pathologist, I have only seen 10 to 15 cases of short returns. Usually the bullet is slowed down, either by a bone, and then when it reaches the skin, which acts like elastic, it brings the bullet back in."

Gunther said she had a difficult time determining the course of the bullet because of the condition the body was found in, and its level of decomposition.

She explained that rigor mortis, one of the recognizable signs of death, depends on what temperature the body is left in.

"If someone is killed the day before and is left in a hot temperature, then the body will be more decomposed than a body which is left in a cooler temperature," she said.

During cross-examination, Gunther said the legs found in the first suitcase looked like a body that died the day before in a hospital and was kept in a cooler.

Virginia Beach police found the first small, dark green Kenneth Cole Reaction carry-on suitcase, which the jury heard contained the legs - cut from the knees down - of the deceased, floating in the water between the fourth island and the high-rise bridge near the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel at 11:30 a.m. on May 5, 2004.

The second matching suitcase, which the jury heard contained the torso of the deceased, was discovered almost a week later on May 11. The third suitcase, a 20-inch, contained the midsection of the deceased, found on May 16.

A toxicology test was conducted on McGuire's body, which came back with negative results for alcohol or drug usage.

Assistant Attorney General Patricia Prezioso questioned the usage of chloral hydrate. The state alleges that Melanie McGuire conducted several Internet searches for the sedative, which is used in the short-term treatment of insomnia and to relieve anxiety and induce sleep before surgery. It is also used after surgery for pain and to treat alcohol withdrawal.

McGuire is accused of forging a prescription for the sedative at a Walgreens just days before she allegedly murdered her husband, authorities have said.

"If the sedative was combined with alcohol more than 24 hours before his death, would the alcohol remain in the body?" asked Prezioso.

Gunther replied, "No."

John Ward, a firearms and toolmarks expert from Virginia Beach, testified that the bullets found with McGuire's body are 2-inch wad cutter flat-nosed bullets, which are commonly used by target shooters.

Ward said the bullets are consistent with the Taurus gun that Melanie McGuire bought, as well as with five other gun manufacturers.

Timothy Lacek, account executive for Hospital Central Services in Allentown, Pa., told the jury that his company supplied Reproductive Medicine Associates office in Morristown, where Melanie McGuire worked, with roughly 100 HCSC medical blankets a week in April 2004.

An HCSC blanket was found in the second suitcase with the torso portion of the deceased.

Under cross-examination, Lacek said his company supplies roughly 100 facilities in New Jersey.

http://www.123people.com/ext/frm?ti=person%20finder&search_term=timothy%20lacek&search_country=US&st=person%20finder&target_url=http%3A%2F%2Flrd.yahooapis.com%2F_ylc%3 DX3oDMTVnaW4ydW50BF9TAzIwMjMxNTI3MDIEYXBwaWQDc1k3W lo2clYzNEhSZm5ZdGVmcmkzRUx4VG5makpERG5QOWVKV1NGSkJ HcTJ1V1dFa0xVdm5IYnNBeUNyVkd5Y2REVElUX2tlBGNsaWVud ANib3NzBHNlcnZpY2UDQk9TUwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEc3JjcHZpZAN qc3RiNjJLSWNycmlybjFJWHBvUzUxdjNXODV4V1VvdXQ1NEFEV TQ3%2FSIG%3D11sad6asq%2F**http%253A%2F%2Fws.gmnews .com%2Fnews%2F2007%2F0314%2FFront_Page%2F002.html&section=weblink&wrt_id=227

[observer]

just asked a friend that is a gun enthusiast-that's hwat he likes to call himself I just say gun freak-he says the number of grooves is that comes form the manufacturer and its not up for grabs. if a 38 is made with 5 grooves thats what all the models that match are made with. if it is made with 6 grooves same thing. the number doesnt vary from gun to gun if thier all the same model. but he thinks that they make so many different kinds of 38s that you can't say that all 38s have the same number of grooves. the model of the gun makes a big difference.

but that's just what they call 'hearsay' I guess. I will look on the web though.

But we know exactly what 38 she bought and we have the manufacturer's site stating how many grooves that 38 had and I think that is all you need. Thank you for talking to your friend.

[Dtviewer3]

It all depends on which model Melanie purchased.

The model 85 Ultra Lite has 6 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=317&category=Revolver


The model 85 Titanium has 5 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=318&category=Revolver

I would bet this turns out to be more defense smoke and mirrors....

[Pinwheel]

whatever happened to that Court TV page that had all those pictures of the evidence? that had the recept for the gun on it and it had the model number i thought. i think it was handwritten too which is just weird to me. i guess that his why gun control is such a hot topic in the usa today.

found this on the web:

http://www.firearmsid.com/A_nogunid.htm'
seems like a helpful page but I don't have time to read the whole thing right now. i will get back to you though.

[Roux]

It all depends on which model Melanie purchased.

The model 85 Ultra Lite has 6 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=317&category=Revolver


The model 85 Titanium has 5 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=318&category=Revolver

I would bet this turns out to be more defense smoke and mirrors....

When the case was re-broadcast on Solved the other night, I think I saw a copy of the receipt for purchase of the gun. Wasn't legible as to model as far as I could see though.

[Dtviewer3]

whatever happened to that Court TV page that had all those pictures of the evidence? that had the recept for the gun on it and it had the model number i thought. i think it was handwritten too which is just weird to me. i guess that his why gun control is such a hot topic in the usa today.

found this on the web:

http://www.firearmsid.com/A_nogunid.htm'
seems like a helpful page but I don't have time to read the whole thing right now. i will get back to you though.


Here in Florida all guns sold are fired first and 2 bullets are kept from the firing and saved.

(At least what a Police Officer friend has told me)

[Dtviewer3]

When the case was re-broadcast on Solved the other night, I think I saw a copy of the receipt for purchase of the gun. Wasn't legible as to model as far as I could see though.

There used to be a picture of the receipt on the court tv web site.

[Pinwheel]

Here in Florida all guns sold are fired first and 2 bullets are kept from the firing and saved.

(At least what a Police Officer friend has told me)

that's really smart idea. why don't all states do that?? that would clear up alot of this mess.

[Pinwheel]

There used to be a picture of the receipt on the court tv web site.

i thought so but I can't google it. i must be doing it wrong. we all know googling will get you into trouble!! :rolleyes:

[observer]

whatever happened to that Court TV page that had all those pictures of the evidence? that had the recept for the gun on it and it had the model number i thought. i think it was handwritten too which is just weird to me. i guess that his why gun control is such a hot topic in the usa today.

found this on the web:

http://www.firearmsid.com/A_nogunid.htm'
seems like a helpful page but I don't have time to read the whole thing right now. i will get back to you though.



From Glatt's book, the serial number of the gun MM bought was XA53389 and 5 grooves and the expert testified the bullets recovered from wm's body had six grooves and lands....I don't think a 5 groove barrell can produce a 6 groove bullet, not an expert but wouldn't common sense lead one in this direction???? forgive my hopefulness...

[Pinwheel]

i found an article that says it was a taurus 85.

http://ws.gmnews.com/news/2007/0418/Front_Page/008.html
i guess we can just go to the taurus web page to search.

[4Life]

It all depends on which model Melanie purchased.

The model 85 Ultra Lite has 6 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=317&category=Revolver


The model 85 Titanium has 5 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=318&category=Revolver

I would bet this turns out to be more defense smoke and mirrors....

Oh you are so right about that. The defense is in for a shock of there own. :laugh: Wait until the states answer comes out

[bugsy]

Its actually pretty neat to read through this page and watch as all of you go through the investigation and research, working through the problem.

And no, I'm not being sarcastic.

[Dtviewer3]

i found an article that says it was a taurus 85.

http://ws.gmnews.com/news/2007/0418/Front_Page/008.html
i guess we can just go to the taurus web page to search.

I posted links above that Taurus 85 can come in different barrels.

Some 5, some 6 groove.

[FallenAngel♥]

Observer,
That's huge news. If it stands, it changes completely the case and proves that Melanie McGuire is absolutely innocent. I am not surprised. All along I had major doubts on whether she was guilty

ITA Len...........

[Pinwheel]

I posted links above that Taurus 85 can come in different barrels.

Some 5, some 6 groove.

yep like 4 pages of guns come up. i'm weirded out now. i don't have my glatt book here so I don't know what the model number is but Observer says XA53389 so I will trust you.

[Dtviewer3]

From Glatt's book, the serial number of the gun MM bought was XA53389 and 5 grooves and the expert testified the bullets recovered from wm's body had six grooves and lands....I don't think a 5 groove barrell can produce a 6 groove bullet, not an expert but wouldn't common sense lead one in this direction???? forgive my hopefulness...


If that info (Glatts') is correct, than you are right.

A 5 groove gun wont produce a bullet with 6 grooves. Or the other way around.

I will wait until the prosecution responds before declaring this 'bombshell' evidence.

[observer]

Oh you are so right about that. The defense is in for a shock of there own. :laugh: Wait until the states answer comes out


I have faith in a firm like B&B that they did their homework....

[bugsy]

If that info (Glatts') is correct, than you are right.

A 5 groove gun wont produce a bullet with 6 grooves. Or the other way around.

I will wait until the prosecution responds before declaring this 'bombshell' evidence.

An open mind though?

[Pinwheel]

If that info (Glatts') is correct, than you are right.

A 5 groove gun wont produce a bullet with 6 grooves. Or the other way around.

I will wait until the prosecution responds before declaring this 'bombshell' evidence.

i'm doing a scooby doo 'ruh row' right now. does it say that in glatts book that 5 can't produce 6 or is that from the web page i posted?

[Dtviewer3]

An open mind though?


About the gun? Absolutely.

About this changing my thoughts about Melanie being guilty? Not even close.

Still too much evidence to the contrary.

[Dtviewer3]

i'm doing a scooby doo 'ruh row' right now. does it say that in glatts book that 5 can't produce 6 or is that from the web page i posted?

Sorry, I never read Glatts book.

[observer]

I always thought Taco didn't do his homework for MM's trial because he believed he had the case won based on reasonable doubt before the trial even started. He was careless, in my opinion, and didn't drive home the doubts that many of us NG's have....I believe he was too confident in his own beliefs and, therefore, did an injustice to MM's case. These are only my opinions. Now if we find this to be true about the grooves on the gun not matching the bullet....I wouldn't want Taco representing me....how could this go unnoticed....?????

[Dtviewer3]

I always thought Taco didn't do his homework for MM's trial because he believed he had the case won based on reasonable doubt before the trial even started. He was careless, in my opinion, and didn't drive home the doubts that many of us NG's have....I believe he was too confident in his own beliefs and, therefore, did an injustice to MM's case. These are only my opinions. Now if we find this to be true about the grooves on the gun not matching the bullet....I wouldn't want Taco representing me....how could this go unnoticed....?????

Maybe it didnt?
Ill wait for more evidence on this one.........

[4Life]

About the gun? Absolutely.

About this changing my thoughts about Melanie being guilty? Not even close.

Still too much evidence to the contrary.

ITA, MM is still guilty. This "New Evidence" will only help the states accomplice theory. Watch and see. That's all I have to say about that.

[4Life]

Maybe it didnt?
Ill wait for more evidence on this one.........

Exactly, wait until the State files their response. THe NGs are counting their "blessings" way to fast

[observer]

I also always thought that was so dumb on MM's part to buy the gun, not only just a few days before you kill your husband, but she also bought it in her own name...and I don't chalk this up to not planning the perfect murder as this was done beforehand when she had time to plan carefully and the wits about herself to plan the perfect murder....I could see mistakes happening after you kill him because of unforeseen things beginning to happen.....

Maybe MM tricked us all and did buy a gun illegally so it couldn't be traced back to her....??? Just a thought.

[observer]

Maybe it didnt?
Ill wait for more evidence on this one.........


I will too, as I can't believe this was overlooked......

[4Life]

Maybe MM tricked us all and did buy a gun illegally so it couldn't be traced back to her....??? Just a thought.

Just to clarify.
MM did buy a gun illegally when she crossed state lines to purchase it and took it back across state lines in NJ

[observer]

Exactly, wait until the State files their response. THe NGs are counting their "blessings" way to fast

No, we are just hopeful at the moment....if this was overlooked and it is factual, it was a critical piece of evidence overlooked. :huh: I think we all want the same thing....the real murderer behind bars for life.....and if by some big chance MM did not do it.....I believe the G's would want her freed....yes?

[observer]

Just to clarify.
MM did buy a gun illegally when she crossed state lines to purchase it and took it back across state lines in NJ

I thought it was an illegal purchase because she bought it with a driver's license that had her living in PA, when in fact she lived in NJ....I could be wrong and stand corrected.:confused:

[4Life]

I thought it was an illegal purchase because she bought it with a driver's license that had her living in PA, when in fact she lived in NJ....I could be wrong and stand corrected.:confused:

Could be that also, not sure. But I do know it is illegal in NJ to cross states lines to buy a gun and bring it back in state

[Len]

Reality is simple. If the gun thatMM bought is not the murder weapon, she is not guilty. The rest of the evidence against her was very weak and exaggerated. JMO. I think she is innocent.

[bugsy]

Reality is simple. If the gun thatMM bought is not the murder weapon, she is not guilty. The rest of the evidence against her was very weak and exaggerated. JMO. I think she is innocent.

Whoever fired the gun that produced the bullets with the 6 grooves found in WM's remains is the murderer.

[observer]

Reality is simple. If the gun thatMM bought is not the murder weapon, she is not guilty. The rest of the evidence against her was very weak and exaggerated. JMO. I think she is innocent.

Len, if you go to yahoo and search "Melanie McGuire Illegal Purchase of Gun" and InSession board thread will come up in which a discussion of how essention the gun was to the case that is interesting reading. Some poster felt that if the gun could not be traced to MM the case should never even have gone to court.

[Pinwheel]

Whoever fired the gun that produced the bullets with the 6 grooves found in WM's remains is the murderer.

that sounds like something from the movie 'clue'. if another murder weapon was used then that introduces reasonable doubt. plus the burden of proof lies with the state to have the evidence straight at trial. the defense has no burden of proof that is the case in all trials. why didn't they get it right? i live in nj and pay big taxes too boot! we residents know our law enforcement are paid well. this doesn't look good for them. i repeat my scooby doo ruh row!

[Dtviewer3]

Whoever fired the gun that produced the bullets with the 6 grooves found in WM's remains is the murderer.

Exactly.
Whether that person is Melanie or not.

[Len]

Whoever fired the gun that produced the bullets with the 6 grooves found in WM's remains is the murderer.



Exactly. That's the obvious. I always had doubts that she was guilty. Now I think she is innocent.

[Pinwheel]

Len, if you go to yahoo and search "Melanie McGuire Illegal Purchase of Gun" and InSession board thread will come up in which a discussion of how essention the gun was to the case that is interesting reading. Some poster felt that if the gun could not be traced to MM the case should never even have gone to court.

the gun was huge as far as I was concerned. why else would someone buy a gun just days before their husband was murdered if they weren't the ones that did it right? the state said that mm's gun was the murder weapon so it made sense. but if that gun didn't kill wm than that calls into question the verdict I think. I don't know if a jury would convict without that gun evidence. for the accomplice theory ok but now that burdens the state more to produce an accomplice which they haven't done in five years since his murder.

[Pinwheel]

Exactly. That's the obvious. I always had doubts that she was guilty. Now I think she is innocent.

i always felt this was not bard but i wont say either way until the state responds. i am curious what they will say. but I do think this pushes me more towards ng. JMO

[Len]

Unless Baker Bots are factually wrong about the grooves, the response of the state will not matter much to me. IMO the rest of he evidence was heavily exaggerated and overinterpreted.

[Topaz]

I looked around on the net for .38 caliber guns.... and they all have 5 lans and grooves.

If the original data from the CSI evaluation of the bullets had a typo and said 6, then that may just be a typo.

Also I wonder if that gun was purchased used? could it have been altered someway, to disguise a previous crime? Do we know that?

They will have to re-examine the bullets to see what the actual
physical evidence shows.

I don't know enough about guns to know what would have 6.

It just might be a "mistake"... the original evidence may show 5.
This is just as likely as there would be another type of error. Until it is cleared up...no one knows, since we do not have access to that evidence.

The fact that MM lied about the gun, twice, is indicative of it being used, IMO. Why lie about it? Didn't buy it, and it was not in the lock box, and she even pressured Finn about getting a gun. So something is not right here. I am sure the bullets will be re-evaluated by both sides.

[4Life]

Reality is simple. If the gun thatMM bought is not the murder weapon, she is not guilty. The rest of the evidence against her was very weak and exaggerated. JMO. I think she is innocent.

This person said it the best:


This is beyond pathetic.

According to Melanie McGuire's supporters, Bill McGuire was killed by a person who knew that Melanie had purchased a firearm two days before, a person who broke into Melanie's apartment to take the gun, some trash bags and some suitcases without taking any other items, a person who cleverly made damning Google searches on the McGuire computer to implicate Melanie, a person who also broke into Melanie's employer's office stealing blankets and his prescription pad to procure chloral hydrate from Melanie's local Walgreen's, a person who omnisciently knew ahead of time that Melanie would travel to Atlantic City and move Bill's car from the lot where he had left it, and a person who cleverly planted $30,000 in Bill's casino winnings and Bill's casino comp card wrapped in Melanie's scrubs in Melanie's dad's basement.

However, this diabolical genius whose criminal brilliance and foresight was unknown in human history, forgot to use the gun he stole from her.


http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090609/NEWS/90609055&s=d&page=1#pluckcomments

[4Life]

I looked around on the net for .38 caliber guns.... and they all have 5 lans and grooves.

If the original data from the CSI evaluation of the bullets had a typo and said 6, then that may just be a typo.

Also I wonder if that gun was used? could it have been altered someway, to disguise a previous crime? Do we know that?

They will have to re-examine the bullets to see what the actual
physical evidence shows.

I don't know enough about guns to know what would have 6.

It just might be a "mistake"... the original evidence may show 5.
This is just as likely as there would be another type of error. Until it is cleared up...no one knows, since we do not have access to that evidence.

The fact that MM lied about the gun, twice, is indicative of it being used, IMO. Why lie about it? Didn't buy it, and it was not in the lock box, and she even pressured Finn about getting a gun. So something is not right here. I am sure the bullets will be re-evaluated by both sides.

There is no way to know whether or not the gun is the murder weapon because it is missing, therefore you can't compare the ballistics from the gun and the bullets found in the body. It's strange how she said the gun was in the lock box, but it wasn't there. Did it just magically disappear?? The answer is obvious. She lied to the cops when she told them it was in the lock box. She probably threw it in the Ocean when she got rid of the body. It's probably sitting at the bottom of the Atlantic and will never be found.

[Dtviewer3]

This person said it the best:


This is beyond pathetic.

According to Melanie McGuire's supporters, Bill McGuire was killed by a person who knew that Melanie had purchased a firearm two days before, a person who broke into Melanie's apartment to take the gun, some trash bags and some suitcases without taking any other items, a person who cleverly made damning Google searches on the McGuire computer to implicate Melanie, a person who also broke into Melanie's employer's office stealing blankets and his prescription pad to procure chloral hydrate from Melanie's local Walgreen's, a person who omnisciently knew ahead of time that Melanie would travel to Atlantic City and move Bill's car from the lot where he had left it, and a person who cleverly planted $30,000 in Bill's casino winnings and Bill's casino comp card wrapped in Melanie's scrubs in Melanie's dad's basement.

However, this diabolical genius whose criminal brilliance and foresight was unknown in human history, forgot to use the gun he stole from her.


http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090609/NEWS/90609055&s=d&page=1#pluckcomments

That genius also made Melanie forget what cabs she took to and from AC, AND that genius snuck into the cab companies and deleted any record of her trips.

And then bribed both cab drivers so they wouldnt come forward about the trips.

Genius is an understatement.......

[Dtviewer3]

I looked around on the net for .38 caliber guns.... and they all have 5 lans and grooves.

If the original data from the CSI evaluation of the bullets had a typo and said 6, then that may just be a typo.

Also I wonder if that gun was purchased used? could it have been altered someway, to disguise a previous crime? Do we know that?

They will have to re-examine the bullets to see what the actual
physical evidence shows.

I don't know enough about guns to know what would have 6.

It just might be a "mistake"... the original evidence may show 5.
This is just as likely as there would be another type of error. Until it is cleared up...no one knows, since we do not have access to that evidence.

The fact that MM lied about the gun, twice, is indicative of it being used, IMO. Why lie about it? Didn't buy it, and it was not in the lock box, and she even pressured Finn about getting a gun. So something is not right here. I am sure the bullets will be re-evaluated by both sides.

Not true Topaz.

I earlier posted links directly from Taurus website, the maker of Melanies gun, that said otherwise. Melanie bought a Taurus .38, model 85.

Some of the .38 caliber Taurus Model 85 guns have 5 grooves, some 6.

Heres my post:
It all depends on which model Melanie purchased.

The model 85 Ultra Lite has 6 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/pr...egory=Revolver


The model 85 Titanium has 5 grooves:
http://www.taurususa.com/products/pr...egory=Revolver

I would bet this turns out to be more defense smoke and mirrors....

[NotAgain]

I never liked or trusted Previoso (sp?). I thought her attitude was always 'win, no matter the cost or truth'.

[Len]

I never liked or trusted Previoso (sp?). I thought her attitude was always 'win, no matter the cost or truth'.


I think PP was convinced that MM was guilty. But if this new point of the appeal stands, she might well have been wrong and MM may be really innocent.

[bugsy]

So what does everyone else think of the myriad of other issues in the appeal (other than the gun.)

[observer]

So what does everyone else think of the myriad of other issues in the appeal (other than the gun.)


I am so thrilled I haven't even had a chance to digest the rest of the news. I thought the part about Devasa's sentencing was interesting as that was not ever brought up....what do you think about that part?

[observer]

I'm also wondering what is meant when it says "the motion filed today asks the appellate court to send the case back to the trial judge and the state has 10 days to decide".

[Dtviewer3]

So what does everyone else think of the myriad of other issues in the appeal (other than the gun.)

Honestly, I'm very very surprised thats all they came up with after all this time.
The issues they brought up in the link I read were VERY weak and I dont see any way possible she would be granted a new trial because of any of those issues. Is there more than these?:


(The appeal, filed by attorney Jamie Kilburg of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Baker Botts, included additional arguments, questioning the reliability of the state's expert witnesses and the incidents that tainted the jury.

It also repeated arguments at trial -- that there was no direct evidence that a murder took place at the Woodbridge apartment.

The appeal also questioned elements of the sentencing, including Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa's decision to enhance the sentence because the crime "was committed in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved matter.''

The appeal asserted, "To aggravate the murder charge, the court had to find that the murder itself was heinous, atrocious and cruel -- not that the separately charged post-conduct was.'')

If not, they better hope their gun/bullet info is correct. If it is, I can see that being a very big issue, though maybe not big enough for her to receive a new trial.
The other stuff--very very weak.

I'm shocked thats all they came up with........

[Pinwheel]

There is no way to know whether or not the gun is the murder weapon because it is missing, therefore you can't compare the ballistics from the gun and the bullets found in the body.

this argument cuts both ways I think. if your saying that it is impossible to know if the gun was the murder weapon without it being found than you can't really say for sure that her having the gun is proof that she killed him. i don't know if i'm saying that right. i guess what i'm trying to say is that if the gun evidence is still up in the air beccause of this it does neither side any good. it's not matched and it's not eliminated. does that make sense?

[observer]

Honestly, I'm very very surprised thats all they came up with after all this time.
The issues they brought up in the link I read were VERY weak and I dont see any way possible she would be granted a new trial because of any of those issues. Is there more than these?:


(The appeal, filed by attorney Jamie Kilburg of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Baker Botts, included additional arguments, questioning the reliability of the state's expert witnesses and the incidents that tainted the jury.

It also repeated arguments at trial -- that there was no direct evidence that a murder took place at the Woodbridge apartment.

The appeal also questioned elements of the sentencing, including Superior Court Judge Frederick DeVesa's decision to enhance the sentence because the crime "was committed in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved matter.''

The appeal asserted, "To aggravate the murder charge, the court had to find that the murder itself was heinous, atrocious and cruel -- not that the separately charged post-conduct was.'')

If not, they better hope their gun/bullet info is correct. If it is, I can see that being a very big issue, though maybe not big enough for her to receive a new trial.
The other stuff--very very weak.

I'm shocked thats all they came up with........

There must be more substance to these other issues I'm assuming since they've requested to file a longer version appeal than what they are allowed...

[Pinwheel]

i can't find the post now but someone said it could be a typo that they said 6 but meant 5 about the grooves? i found this from the truTV site. it's the photo gallery i thought had a picture of the gun recept but i found this guy instead.

http://www.trutv.com/shows/the_investigators/mcguire_gallery.html?curPhoto=12

he's actually looking at the bullets on the stand while testifying or thats what it looks like to me. if it's a typo about the 6 than he said it on the stand too. I don't think it's a typo my friends. when can we the people get to read this appeal? wouldn't it be nice if they posted it on one of the news web pages?

[Dtviewer3]

this argument cuts both ways I think. if your saying that it is impossible to know if the gun was the murder weapon without it being found than you can't really say for sure that her having the gun is proof that she killed him. i don't know if i'm saying that right. i guess what i'm trying to say is that if the gun evidence is still up in the air beccause of this it does neither side any good. it's not matched and it's not eliminated. does that make sense?

Not really. Thats what circumstantial evidence is all about. You have to weigh it and decide what is likely or reasonable.

We know Melanie bought a .38. We know WM was killed with a .38.
We know Melanie bought .38 wadcutter bullets. We know WM died from .38 wadcutter bullets.
We know Melanie bought a Taurus 85. We know the bullet markings were consistent with being fired from a Taurus 85.
We also know Melanies gun and bullets disappeared when Wm left/disappeared.



Is it possible it was coincidence/a different gun/etc etc?

Of course its possible. Anythings possible.
But the reasonable conclusion is that was the gun and bullets WM was killed with.

[observer]

i can't find the post now but someone said it could be a typo that they said 6 but meant 5 about the grooves? i found this from the truTV site. it's the photo gallery i thought had a picture of the gun recept but i found this guy instead.

http://www.trutv.com/shows/the_investigators/mcguire_gallery.html?curPhoto=12

he's actually looking at the bullets on the stand while testifying or thats what it looks like to me. if it's a typo about the 6 than he said it on the stand too. I don't think it's a typo my friends. when can we the people get to read this appeal? wouldn't it be nice if they posted it on one of the news web pages?

I'm not sure how this might be a typo came about, maybe I'm not understanding, but as I've said I'm sure B&B did their homework and referred back to transcripts from the trial, etc. and can back up their statement very well that the bullets did not come from the gun MM purchased...wouldn't you think. and how damaging you have this expert up there stating the bullet was consistent with the gun MM purchased....and if it is proven his statement is wrong, I believe it could lead to a new trial. A new trial is granted based on whether the outcome might have been different, and surely the outcome could have been different if it was proven that the bullets that killed WM could not have come from the gun MM purchased, especially since the prosecution based said over and over again that the gun she purchased was used to kill him

[Pinwheel]

i think your third thing is the sticking point. if the gun she bought isn't consistent with the bullets from his body than the gun she bought is irrelevant. and heres something else i just thought of. if the gun she bought isn't the murder weapon why get rid of it? weird.

[observer]

i think your third thing is the sticking point. if the gun she bought isn't consistent with the bullets from his body than the gun she bought is irrelevant. and heres something else i just thought of. if the gun she bought isn't the murder weapon why get rid of it? weird.

who says she got rid of it? No one really knows if she got rid of it......Wm could have taken the gun. I always thought it was strange the gun was gone but yet an empty box of bullets were left behind....

[Pinwheel]

who says she got rid of it? No one really knows if she got rid of it......Wm could have taken the gun. I always thought it was strange the gun was gone but yet an empty box of bullets were left behind....

i didn't say she got rid of it but it's 'rid of' somehow. if she was telling the truth and he took it than whoever killed then got it from him so they have it but it's gone. that's what I meant. wait i see your point. than no one got rid of it really if that's the case. sorry blood sugar low. i need some ice cream. :blushing:

[Dtviewer3]

i didn't say she got rid of it but it's 'rid of' somehow. if she was telling the truth and he took it than whoever killed then got it from him so they have it but it's gone. that's what I meant. wait i see your point. than no one got rid of it really if that's the case. sorry blood sugar low. i need some ice cream. :blushing:

So 'after' he arrives in Atlantic City but before he checks into a hotel someone grabs him, grabs his luggage, his trash bags, a medical blanket, his gun, and possibly his bullets.
They then kill him with either his bullets or the same type, but not with his gun.
Nobody sees all this happen, and then Melanie drives over a hundred miles to find his car and play a 'joke' on him and move the car.
Shes so tired she then takes a cab back home, abut cant remember what cab, and no evidence of the cab ride is ever found.
The next day she calls a cab to take her back all the way to AC to pick up her car, and once again, cant remember what cab she took, and no evidence of a cab ride is ever found by LE OR the defenses private investigator.

Then she goes and files a restraining order against Wm.

Doesnt make sense. The whole story is ridiculous......

[4Life]

So 'after' he arrives in Atlantic City but before he checks into a hotel someone grabs him, grabs his luggage, his trash bags, a medical blanket, his gun, and possibly his bullets.
They then kill him with either his bullets or the same type, but not with his gun.
Nobody sees all this happen, and then Melanie drives over a hundred miles to find his car and play a 'joke' on him and move the car.
Shes so tired she then takes a cab back home, abut cant remember what cab, and no evidence of the cab ride is ever found.
The next day she calls a cab to take her back all the way to AC to pick up her car, and once again, cant remember what cab she took, and no evidence of a cab ride is ever found by LE OR the defenses private investigator.

Then she goes and files a restraining order against Wm.

Doesnt make sense. The whole story is ridiculous......

You forgot to add that she changed the car story from she was too tired to drive home to the new story that she could not find her car

[observer]

i didn't say she got rid of it but it's 'rid of' somehow. if she was telling the truth and he took it than whoever killed then got it from him so they have it but it's gone. that's what I meant. wait i see your point. than no one got rid of it really if that's the case. sorry blood sugar low. i need some ice cream. :blushing:

:thumbup: :smile:

[observer]

So 'after' he arrives in Atlantic City but before he checks into a hotel someone grabs him, grabs his luggage, his trash bags, a medical blanket, his gun, and possibly his bullets.
They then kill him with either his bullets or the same type, but not with his gun.
Nobody sees all this happen, and then Melanie drives over a hundred miles to find his car and play a 'joke' on him and move the car.
Shes so tired she then takes a cab back home, abut cant remember what cab, and no evidence of the cab ride is ever found.
The next day she calls a cab to take her back all the way to AC to pick up her car, and once again, cant remember what cab she took, and no evidence of a cab ride is ever found by LE OR the defenses private investigator.

Then she goes and files a restraining order against Wm.

Doesnt make sense. The whole story is ridiculous......

I agree it's ridiculous, but it's just as ridiculous as the story PP paints as to how she did do it...we not only don't know where it was done, now we don't even know if we have the murder weapon???? Did it make sense for MM to drive all that way to dump him off a bridge when there are so many places in NJ, especially in Toms River where her dad lives.....and no one saw her lugging three suitcases out of her trunk and then dumping them over the bridge....would she risk taking a chance of throwing them over the bridge and them not sinking.....???? She had surer chance of taking them out on a boat at the Jersey Shore and dumping them overboard and being close enough so she could make sure they sunk....it's ridiculous that she'd drove all that distance with a smelly dead body and risked being pulled over by a cop. Does it make sense that she kept the dead body around for a few days or however long and went through the trouble of keeping at least the legs on ice? Why didn't she just get rid of it the night she killed him???? Nothing really makes sense....

[annalyzer]

So 'after' he arrives in Atlantic City but before he checks into a hotel someone grabs him, grabs his luggage, his trash bags, a medical blanket, his gun, and possibly his bullets.
They then kill him with either his bullets or the same type, but not with his gun.
Nobody sees all this happen, and then Melanie drives over a hundred miles to find his car and play a 'joke' on him and move the car.
Shes so tired she then takes a cab back home, abut cant remember what cab, and no evidence of the cab ride is ever found.
The next day she calls a cab to take her back all the way to AC to pick up her car, and once again, cant remember what cab she took, and no evidence of a cab ride is ever found by LE OR the defenses private investigator.

Then she goes and files a restraining order against Wm.

Doesnt make sense. The whole story is ridiculous......

Of course it is. It's the SODDI defense. :lol:

[annalyzer]

Maybe the body parts were wrapped up in a sheet of plastic in the shower stall. The legs were on top. She put ice on the body to keep it cool and only the legs got the effect from it.

No wonder she got a motel room for 3 days. :scared:

[BigDude]

I think PP should hire herself a publicist or get a lawyer to shut her mouth. I think her statement in the paper saying that no one else caught the bullet mistake is preposterous. I think she has gotten so shook up, she can't talk right. But if she had told the truth in the beginning, her story wouldn't have been so messed up in the paper. What else has been covered up? Any idea?
BIG D

[observer]

I think PP should hire herself a publicist or get a lawyer to shut her mouth. I think her statement in the paper saying that no one else caught the bullet mistake is preposterous. I think she has gotten so shook up, she can't talk right. But if she had told the truth in the beginning, her story wouldn't have been so messed up in the paper. What else has been covered up? Any idea?
BIG D

Here, Here...for her to say that....she must have been shaken up!!! It was a very stupid thing to say....she could have said she had no comment as she hadn't yet read the appeal, something to that effect....

[4Life]

I think PP should hire herself a publicist or get a lawyer to shut her mouth. I think her statement in the paper saying that no one else caught the bullet mistake is preposterous. I think she has gotten so shook up, she can't talk right. But if she had told the truth in the beginning, her story wouldn't have been so messed up in the paper. What else has been covered up? Any idea?
BIG D

Boy you are quick to judge, seems like you might be eatting your words when you read the answer from the State

[4Life]

PP repeatly said that she could not put the gun in MMs hand, that is why she was convicted on accomplice liabilty. In this case, being as the defense and the ME both stated that WM COULD have been shot UP TO 4 times its more than possible that the 2 missing bullets DO MATCH MMs gun.
All this might prove is that MMs accomplice might have also shot him with a gun that would produce a bullet with 6 groves.

All just need to wait to read the States response

[BigDude]

Boy you are quick to judge, seems like you might be eatting your words when you read the answer from the State

I am not worried about having to eat my words at all!!! The appeal speaks for itself and it is very damaging to the state. PP has already started eating her words and it was as if she were talking with a mouthful. The state's case has been exposed for the sham it was. The jurors were a disgrace to society and the judicial system.
BIGD

[4Life]

I am not worried about having to eat my words at all!!! The appeal speaks for itself and it is very damaging to the state. PP has already started eating her words and it was as if she were talking with a mouthful. The state's case has been exposed for the sham it was. The jurors were a disgrace to society and the judicial system.
BIGDYou'll see sweetie :lol:

[4Life]

I think PP was convinced that MM was guilty. But if this new point of the appeal stands, she might well have been wrong and MM may be really innocent.

Um, a prosecutor is suppose to think the person on trial is innocent? No, not is the USA. A prosecutors job is to have the person convicted

[Jack&Jill]

Boy you are quick to judge, seems like you might be eatting your words when you read the answer from the State


Why should we NOT JUDGE ? PP made grave errors ,or were they on purpose . I don't wish for anyone to eat crow ,only that MM either gets set free or a new trial based on FACTS that can be proven .

[Jack&Jill]

PP repeatly said that she could not put the gun in MMs hand, that is why she was convicted on accomplice liabilty. In this case, being as the defense and the ME both stated that WM COULD have been shot UP TO 4 times its more than possible that the 2 missing bullets DO MATCH MMs gun.
All this might prove is that MMs accomplice might have also shot him with a gun that would produce a bullet with 6 groves.

All just need to wait to read the States response


Nuh ugh , I did not just read that . WEll yes I did ....okay so you are really saying that there were 2 guns involved now because the GUN MM purchased was not the murder weapon ?


Now we have the reciprocal of what this board was all about in this case long ago, except NOW there is NO SMOKING GUN , yet the G's are saying there may be one out there , somewhere over the rainbow ...


WOW.

[Jack&Jill]

You'll see sweetie :lol:

You seem very upset , try and relax , spike a drink or two please, it will help.

[Jack&Jill]

i always felt this was not bard but i wont say either way until the state responds. i am curious what they will say. but I do think this pushes me more towards ng. JMO

IMO it doesn't matter what the STATE says . they had better be doing b what the STATE should be doing and allowing for a new trial or let her go since clearly the other evidence is just BS !

No question about it !

[Jack&Jill]

That genius also made Melanie forget what cabs she took to and from AC, AND that genius snuck into the cab companies and deleted any record of her trips.

And then bribed both cab drivers so they wouldnt come forward about the trips.

Genius is an understatement.......


no I wouldn't call them genius at all. the real murderer hopefully will be discovered and my hope is that then it will be clear how CLOSE to home the murderer was and so all these other little coincidences will no longer be a mystery at all.

[FallenAngel♥]

Maybe the body parts were wrapped up in a sheet of plastic in the shower stall. The legs were on top. She put ice on the body to keep it cool and only the legs got the effect from it.

No wonder she got a motel room for 3 days. :scared:

were there no security camera's at that motel?
and where did she get all that ice? don't say the ice machine because there would have been people see her get dozens of buckets of ice.

[Len]

Um, a prosecutor is suppose to think the person on trial is innocent? No, not is the USA. A prosecutors job is to have the person convicted

Nope. A prosecutor job is to advocate for justice and for the correct person to be convicted. PP should ask for a new trial herself at this point. She admitted that both the prosecution and the defense had missed that critical information. Based on that, MM deserves a new trial. There is huge reasonable doubt after this. That's my opinion at least.

[Topaz]

I think first off, is re-examining the gun and bullet evidence to see if there is really an "error".

[Len]

I think first off, is re-examining the gun and bullet evidence to see if there is really an "error".

Topaz,
BB would not put their reputation online for something like that. I am sure they checked and know it is not just a typo. Also, dont forget that BB represents MM pro-bono. They must really believe in her innocence.

Anyway, this case is a very twisted case. Although MM looks guilty because of some of her actions, there was zero reliable physical evidence and no crime scene. I still thought she may be guilty because she had bought a gun and that was very incriminating. But if that can not be the gun that was used in the murder, there is no longer a serious case against her. She most definitely deserves a new trial, and I hope that the prosecution will request that as well. The idea of the justice system is to find and convict the person who committed the crime.

[Len]

So 'after' he arrives in Atlantic City but before he checks into a hotel someone grabs him, grabs his luggage, his trash bags, a medical blanket, his gun, and possibly his bullets.
They then kill him with either his bullets or the same type, but not with his gun.
Nobody sees all this happen, and then Melanie drives over a hundred miles to find his car and play a 'joke' on him and move the car.
Shes so tired she then takes a cab back home, abut cant remember what cab, and no evidence of the cab ride is ever found.
The next day she calls a cab to take her back all the way to AC to pick up her car, and once again, cant remember what cab she took, and no evidence of a cab ride is ever found by LE OR the defenses private investigator.

Then she goes and files a restraining order against Wm.

Doesnt make sense. The whole story is ridiculous......


The prosecution's story with the murder happening in that TH in the absence of any evidence and after using CH (despite the negative tests) is not much better. In fact, IMO it less believable that MM's story about the cab rides.

[Len]

So what does everyone else think of the myriad of other issues in the appeal (other than the gun.)

What are the other issues. Can you briefly list them?

[Pinwheel]

pp tells this article that it was missed by them.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

she's not saying it's a typo or an error. besides both virginia and nj had experts on the state and both said the same thing about 6 lands and grooves. those gun makers dont make the same model gun with different numbers of lands and grooves.

[Pinwheel]

it still early for me and i'm too tired to find who wrote this earlier but someone said that pp suggested that mm's helpers shot him. that's not according to articles about the trial. she said that that gun shot him not someone elses gun.

Once he was unconscious, his wife wrapped a pillow around the .38-caliber gun, shot him in the head and chest and began the dismemberment at her leisure, Prezioso charged. Weeks later, the townhouse was spotlessly clean, void of even the normal fingerprint or hair that would be left behind by a family of four, Prezioso said.
http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2007/07/prosecution_calls_mcguire_a_co.html

what kind of ballistics expert doesn't look into the model the defendant purchased when they had all the info from her recept? that makes no sense!! they dont need a web page to tell them what the gun had they have a database.

[NotAgain]

snipped A prosecutors job is to have the person convicted

Absolutely incorrect. The prosecutor's job is to seek justice AND truth. If the prosecutor knowingly withholds evidence, then the prosecutor is guilty of a crime. It is NOT win at any cost.

TRUTH and JUSTICE! This is not a game.

[Len]

pp tells this article that it was missed by them.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

she's not saying it's a typo or an error. besides both virginia and nj had experts on the state and both said the same thing about 6 lands and grooves. those gun makers dont make the same model gun with different numbers of lands and grooves.



That statement above of PP should be enough for a new trial. Missing such critical evidence had a huge impact on the outcome of the trial. Buying the gun that was presumably used in the murder was the most incriminating evidence against MM. This new info is essentially a proof that that gun was not used in the murder.

[vonna]

I have no doubt she is guilty. Produce the gun then say it doesn't match.

I have no doubt either - unless the same person who killed OJ's wife killed Bill McGuire.

[Great Dane]

PP repeatly said that she could not put the gun in MMs hand, that is why she was convicted on accomplice liabilty. In this case, being as the defense and the ME both stated that WM COULD have been shot UP TO 4 times its more than possible that the 2 missing bullets DO MATCH MMs gun.
All this might prove is that MMs accomplice might have also shot him with a gun that would produce a bullet with 6 groves.

All just need to wait to read the States response

So in addition to drugging him, they had to shoot him four times to be dead? It's not like he was a running target....

[Great Dane]

The prosecution's story with the murder happening in that TH in the absence of any evidence and after using CH (despite the negative tests) is not much better. In fact, IMO it less believable that MM's story about the cab rides.

People don't serve life in prison for taking cab rides, for taking trips to AC, for trying to get an EZ Pass charge removed....without testing positive for the CH, without a matching gun, without DNA.....PP's already elaborate closing, does not hold any weight....

I wonder how Brad feels about this new information...

[observer]

The prosecution's story with the murder happening in that TH in the absence of any evidence and after using CH (despite the negative tests) is not much better. In fact, IMO it less believable that MM's story about the cab rides.


You are so right Len...PP's story is just a ridiculous if not more so. I truly believe PP had this information, and just didn't produce it...she may be looking at Jail time:thumbup:

[observer]

What are the other issues. Can you briefly list them?

From my understanding there are other issues but have not yet been detailed as a motion was filed by the defense for permission to file a brief or whatever they call it longer than the amount of pages they are allowed to file and I am assuming this brief will go into the detail about the other issues....someone correct me if I'm wrong....I'm not certain...what happened yesterday was a motion...

[observer]

pp tells this article that it was missed by them.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

she's not saying it's a typo or an error. besides both virginia and nj had experts on the state and both said the same thing about 6 lands and grooves. those gun makers dont make the same model gun with different numbers of lands and grooves.


I like your reasoning Pinwheel it makes sense..:thumbup:

[observer]

That statement above of PP should be enough for a new trial. Missing such critical evidence had a huge impact on the outcome of the trial. Buying the gun that was presumably used in the murder was the most incriminating evidence against MM. This new info is essentially a proof that that gun was not used in the murder.

And Len and appeal is granted based on whether or not issues brought forth could have changed the outcome of the trial...so she should be getting a new trial!

[Great Dane]

You are so right Len...PP's story is just a ridiculous if not more so. I truly believe PP had this information, and just didn't produce it...she may be looking at Jail time:thumbup:

I think PP looked at what matched and the experts took the stand, made it seem as though they were a match....much like in Glatt's book, when she finds the search for undetectable poison and then BAM they find the script for CH....she was just trying to make the pieces fit....like with the green fiber, they never found ANYTHING in the house that matched that green fiber, but she managed to have CL recall some "missing" pillows...and use them in her closing argument...and she utilized the CH in her closing, but as Len has mentioned in detail...it was never proven to have been used....

I think PP had it out for MM, I think thier was a lot of negative stuff said over the phone, stuff that PP was obviously privy to hear....that made her want to get MM, that....and let's face it, CL and the rest of her family, The Rices, were all convinced it was MM....so, they fed into whatever they could to make sure she took the fall and while I think they thought she was the murderer...perhaps this evidence, will give them some doubt....

[observer]

I think PP looked at what matched and the experts took the stand, made it seem as though they were a match....much like in Glatt's book, when she finds the search for undetectable poison and then BAM they find the script for CH....she was just trying to make the pieces fit....like with the green fiber, they never found ANYTHING in the house that matched that green fiber, but she managed to have CL recall some "missing" pillows...and use them in her closing argument...and she utilized the CH in her closing, but as Len has mentioned in detail...it was never proven to have been used....

I think PP had it out for MM, I think thier was a lot of negative stuff said over the phone, stuff that PP was obviously privy to hear....that made her want to get MM, that....and let's face it, CL and the rest of her family, The Rices, were all convinced it was MM....so, they fed into whatever they could to make sure she took the fall and while I think they thought she was the murderer...perhaps this evidence, will give them some doubt....



PP based her closing argument on things that were not proven during the trial, e.g. use of CH, etc. and as you say matched exaggerated and unproven details to fit her scenario. The jury bought hook, line and sinker! The Rices and CL thought MM was guilty from the very beginning, before any circumstantial evidence was found...they had it in for her as did PP. And the real shame is that the real murderer in running around free.

[Dtviewer3]

pp tells this article that it was missed by them.

"This was something missed by the prosecution and the defense, with the information that was right there (on the Internet),'' Prezioso said.

she's not saying it's a typo or an error. besides both virginia and nj had experts on the state and both said the same thing about 6 lands and grooves. those gun makers dont make the same model gun with different numbers of lands and grooves.

Yes, they do and I already posted links directly from the gun makers page.

The model 85 comes in many versions. Some with 5 grooves and some with 6.

We will have to see the prosecutions response before jumping to any conclusions.

I will say I believe this will turn out to be typical smoke and mirrors from the defense.

If it does turn out to be true and PROVEN that the gun she bought could not of been the gun used, then I will agree she should get a new trial.

At this point I dont believe the states gun expert 'missed' this fact.
If its true, the expert should have brought this out in court. If he knew this and didnt he should be sanctioned.

[Len]

We will have to see the prosecutions response before jumping to any conclusions.

I will say I believe this will turn out to be typical smoke and mirrors from the defense.

If it does turn out to be true and PROVEN that the gun she bought could not of been the gun used, then I will agree she should get a new trial.

At this point I dont believe the states gun expert 'missed' this fact.
If its true, the expert should have brought this out in court. If he knew this and didnt he should be sanctioned.


Are you in denial? Did you see what PP said responding to this new evidence? Read again the quotes. She admitted that this evidence was missed by both the prosecution and the defense. Try to be a little open minded. If MM is not guilty she should not be in jail. I am sure you agree on that. And the facts are clear after this. She deserves a new trial. The case against her without the gun is very weak.

[Dtviewer3]

Are you in denial? Did you see what PP said responding to this new evidence? Read again the quotes. She admitted that this evidence was missed by both the prosecution and the defense. Try to be a little open minded. If MM is not guilty she should not be in jail. I am sure you agree on that. And the facts are clear after this. She deserves a new trial. The case against her without the gun is very weak.


Denial?
Nope, just not jumping to any conclusions based on a few snippets of quotes and a defense brief.

There are no facts that are 'clear' as of yet. Only a claim by the defense without a shred of proof to back it up.

Since when is what the defense (or prosecutors) say considered proof without the other side having a chance to respond? Without experts to testify?

Ill give you a clue. Never.

[BigDude]

Are you in denial? Did you see what PP said responding to this new evidence? Read again the quotes. She admitted that this evidence was missed by both the prosecution and the defense. Try to be a little open minded. If MM is not guilty she should not be in jail. I am sure you agree on that. And the facts are clear after this. She deserves a new trial. The case against her without the gun is very weak.

LeN---

Again you are right on target. If the gun wasn't MM's, the juror misconduct, and PP's story that was based on lies, should grant MM a new trial or immediate freedom. If they don't have a crime scene, motive, or a weapon--what on earth would the state use against her?
BIGD

[Dtviewer3]

LeN---

Again you are right on target. If the gun wasn't MM's, the juror misconduct, and PP's story that was based on lies, should grant MM a new trial or immediate freedom. If they don't have a crime scene, motive, or a weapon--what on earth would the state use against her?
BIGD


Believe it or not 'where', 'why' and 'how' are not necessary elements to prove murder.

[GossipGirl]

Appeals only deal with errors of law, not new evidence. They only look at the trial records as they exist from the case.
This evidence or info about the gun was available to all and not looked into, so I'm not sure it can or will be considered.
I think I read somewhere that new evidence cannot be brought in if it was available during the trial. For instance, DNA stuff via the Innocence Project that was not available at trial is the main reason they get convictions overturned. DNA testing is now available, so old cases get cleared up.
In this case, I believe PP is stating that this info was available to all and not found by anyone or even looked into so therefore it will be discounted.
I think this makes the defense look worse than the prosecution.
JMO tho.
GG

[GossipGirl]

I think PP should hire herself a publicist or get a lawyer to shut her mouth. I think her statement in the paper saying that no one else caught the bullet mistake is preposterous. I think she has gotten so shook up, she can't talk right. But if she had told the truth in the beginning, her story wouldn't have been so messed up in the paper. What else has been covered up? Any idea?
BIG D


If info available to both was not used or looked into, then she's smart as a whip to say what she did. If it was available and not used, oh well.....
I think that's a rule of appeals, so, she's right in there covering the state's tail.
No?

[Great Dane]

I would think that if such an important over sight occurred, that it would in fact be grounds for a new trial...perhaps that isn't the standard, but I think I read that this was being presented to DeVesa as well....perhpas the original judge will need to make a determination about the role that specific piece of evidence played in getting a conviction....

While I have admitted repeatedly that JT dropped the ball, he's not a specialist on guns etc., how can the gun guy take the stand and make such a grave mistake????

[GossipGirl]

We need a link to the transcripts. I asked CW to open our old forum in hopes we can see and use all of our old links.
GG

[GossipGirl]

I would think that if such an important over sight occurred, that it would in fact be grounds for a new trial...perhaps that isn't the standard, but I think I read that this was being presented to DeVesa as well....perhpas the original judge will need to make a determination about the role that specific piece of evidence played in getting a conviction....

While I have admitted repeatedly that JT dropped the ball, he's not a specialist on guns etc., how can the gun guy take the stand and make such a grave mistake????


I'm not sure morality plays into the courtroom at all but you do make an interesting point. As far as I know, judges just judge on what is put before them, they are not involved in making sure each side dots every I and crosses every T.
The jury is in the same boat, they can only make decisions on what they were presented with.
I am a bit amazed that none of us, in our apparent infinite wisdom, never thought to look at the Taurus site, it was there all along.
GG

[observer]

Are you in denial? Did you see what PP said responding to this new evidence? Read again the quotes. She admitted that this evidence was missed by both the prosecution and the defense. Try to be a little open minded. If MM is not guilty she should not be in jail. I am sure you agree on that. And the facts are clear after this. She deserves a new trial. The case against her without the gun is very weak.

Am I missing something....? They have the serial number of the gun MM purchased and wouldn't you think that they could can go back and find out how many grooves were in that gun?????? Yes, some model T38s were made with 6 vs. 5, but they didn't just shoot them down the production line at random and produce some with 6, some 5, etc. Just as there are different style Honda Civics for example, the manufacturer made different model T 38s? To think that B&B did not do their homework on this and have just raised this as a smoke screen is just as ridiculous as PP's closing arument.

[bugsy]

Yes, they do and I already posted links directly from the gun makers page.

The model 85 comes in many versions. Some with 5 grooves and some with 6.

We will have to see the prosecutions response before jumping to any conclusions.

I will say I believe this will turn out to be typical smoke and mirrors from the defense.

If it does turn out to be true and PROVEN that the gun she bought could not of been the gun used, then I will agree she should get a new trial.

At this point I dont believe the states gun expert 'missed' this fact.
If its true, the expert should have brought this out in court. If he knew this and didnt he should be sanctioned.

But the models (plural) of gun you pointed out were just that, 2 different models of gun.

The point is that the specific model of gun purchased by MM, a .38 Cal model 85B2, was only munufactured with 5 grooves, you can't say that because another model of .38 Cal Taurus, such as the ones you linked to before could have six grooves, that the 85b2 could have 6 grooves. It doesn't.

It has 5.

[GossipGirl]

What a shame that the defense didn't bother going down this path a few years ago.
I still am not convinced that info available at trial is allowed in after the fact.
GG

[Great Dane]

While I too am a little shocked that no one here picked up on that, in our defense....they did have a specialist take the stand.....

With that being said, it makes you wonder if the garbage bag specialist was in fact accurate, do you recall the other woman, the one that had issues with her math skills that said what he said was untrue....if given the opportunity I hope that BB will take the case apart and attack it with more fury and passion than JT did....he is supposed to be this high end power lawyer, but I thought he was a bit of a dud....:glare:

Maybe he wasted all of his brain power on Van Der Sloot?

[Dtviewer3]

But the models (plural) of gun you pointed out were just that, 2 different models of gun.

The point is that the specific model of gun purchased by MM, a .38 Cal model 85B2, was only munufactured with 5 grooves, you can't say that because another model of .38 Cal Taurus, such as the ones you linked to before could have six grooves, that the 85b2 could have 6 grooves. It doesn't.

It has 5.

IF it is true she purchased a model 85B2, then yes.

I havent seen the receipt in a couple of years and nobody has been able to locate it on this board.

All I have been able to find was that she had purchased a .38 Taurus Model 85.

[Satyagraha]

If someone accused me of murder
and if I had a gun
I'd make the slightest effort to
go look for it
to prove 'twas NOT my gun .
It's in the lockbox .
I don't remember where it is .
Oh what a tangled web she weaved-
consciously or not .
.
Nor do I necessarily believe the Prezioso version .
Maybe it's simple math .
Make two columns and reiterate
what is in Melanie's favor now
and what is not .

[Great Dane]

If WM left with the gun, where is she supposed to magically get the gun from?

[Dtviewer3]

If someone accused me of murder
and if I had a gun
I'd make the slightest effort to
go look for it
to prove 'twas NOT my gun .
It's in the lockbox .
I don't remember where it is .
Oh what a tangled web she weaved-
consciously or not .
.
Nor do I necessarily believe the Prezioso version .
Maybe it's simple math .
Make two columns and reiterate
what is in Melanie's favor now
and what is not .


Hiya Saty! :seeya:

[Pinwheel]

PP repeatly said that she could not put the gun in MMs hand (snipped)

that is not true. not true at all. pp said repeatedly that wm was killed with mm's gun. her whole closing argument was about how mm drugged and shot him in the apartment. she said in her closing that disposing of his body was probably where she had help. did you even watch this trial??

[Pinwheel]

(snipped) In this case, being as the defense and the ME both stated that WM COULD have been shot UP TO 4 times its more than possible that the 2 missing bullets DO MATCH MMs gun.
All this might prove is that MMs accomplice might have also shot him with a gun that would produce a bullet with 6 groves.


you are saying that two people, mm and someone else, shot wm at the same time? why? why would he need to be shot by two different people if he was already drugged and passed out? that makes no sense. :rolleyes:

[Great Dane]

Agreed Pinwheel...:tonguewag:

[Pinwheel]

I like your reasoning Pinwheel it makes sense..:thumbup:

thank you. once i get some coffee in me i can have some clarity. :laugh:
why isn't that new guy on the case telling her to stop? she admitted now that the state made a mistake iwth the gun and the STATE hasn't had a chance to respond yet!! it's not her place to say these things now. she needs to shut up.

[annalyzer]

Looking for info and/or receipt of gun purchase.. no luck so far.. found this.. lots of news articles on the trial

http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/archive.php?ac=t&forumid=124593&date=01-11-2008&t=1021446-1

[GossipGirl]

thank you. once i get some coffee in me i can have some clarity. :laugh:
why isn't that new guy on the case telling her to stop? she admitted now that the state made a mistake iwth the gun and the STATE hasn't had a chance to respond yet!! it's not her place to say these things now. she needs to shut up.

There's more to it than that; if it's shown that neither the defense nor the prosecution utilized available info, the appeals court may rule that the evidence cannot be brought in. It was out there for all to use.
She's really not that stupid.
As to the closing, you have to discount both of them as they are not allowed to be used by the jury as anything more than supposition.
These are rules of law I believe.
closings, tho nice, are essentially useless.

same with Glatt's book that everyone keeps talking about, it isn't factual, so forget it.
GG

[GossipGirl]

If someone accused me of murder
and if I had a gun
I'd make the slightest effort to
go look for it
to prove 'twas NOT my gun .
It's in the lockbox .
I don't remember where it is .
Oh what a tangled web she weaved-
consciously or not .
.
Nor do I necessarily believe the Prezioso version .
Maybe it's simple math .
Make two columns and reiterate
what is in Melanie's favor now
and what is not .

Wasn't it supposed to be in the 2nd storage unit for which he had no key? How was he to get it? Only her Dad had a key, right?
Personally, I'd have liked to see the storage records of comings and goings to see who wandered in. MOst of these places have camera's.
GG

[Pinwheel]

Yes, they do and I already posted links directly from the gun makers page.

The model 85 comes in many versions. Some with 5 grooves and some with 6.

We will have to see the prosecutions response before jumping to any conclusions.

I will say I believe this will turn out to be typical smoke and mirrors from the defense.

If it does turn out to be true and PROVEN that the gun she bought could not of been the gun used, then I will agree she should get a new trial.

At this point I dont believe the states gun expert 'missed' this fact.
If its true, the expert should have brought this out in court. If he knew this and didnt he should be sanctioned.

the model numbers are longer than '85'. i think that's just a classification like saying general motors chevy line of cars but then chevy has all different kinds of models under that. and if you search their web page for just 85 4 pages come up and some dont have any grooves at all. i think the state should have an opportunity to respond but pp has already admitted that the state missed this.

[GossipGirl]

You know, there's no morality in courts. If charges are brought, it's up to the defendant to fight them with whatever ammo they have. If they don't then the defendant is found guilty.
For instance: I get pulled over on a traffic violation and don't have my valid insurance card with me, or my new registration. both are sitting in my house. If I don't bring them to court to show I had insurance and registration, then down I go on those charges.
For this reason atty's make so much money.

GG

[GossipGirl]

the model numbers are longer than '85'. i think that's just a classification like saying general motors chevy line of cars but then chevy has all different kinds of models under that. and if you search their web page for just 85 4 pages come up and some dont have any grooves at all. i think the state should have an opportunity to respond but pp has already admitted that the state missed this.

She admitted that both she and the defense missed this, setting the scenario for the evidence to be dismissed. It's not her client that was convicted for leaving a stone unturned, it's Taco's.
He's the one that should have done this homework, especially as he gets GaJillion dollars an hour.
He didn't spend the money on any of it, including this kind of background work his paralegals could have done for him. There was not any money to spend on this, she should have stuck with her old atty, the one PP hired.
GG

[observer]

:lol::lol:you are saying that two people, mm and someone else, shot wm at the same time? why? why would he need to be shot by two different people if he was already drugged and passed out? that makes no sense. :rolleyes:

this is so funny...now he was shot by two people at the same time and drugged and passed out at the same time

[Pinwheel]

Appeals only deal with errors of law, not new evidence. They only look at the trial records as they exist from the case.
This evidence or info about the gun was available to all and not looked into, so I'm not sure it can or will be considered.
I think I read somewhere that new evidence cannot be brought in if it was available during the trial. For instance, DNA stuff via the Innocence Project that was not available at trial is the main reason they get convictions overturned. DNA testing is now available, so old cases get cleared up.
In this case, I believe PP is stating that this info was available to all and not found by anyone or even looked into so therefore it will be discounted.
I think this makes the defense look worse than the prosecution.
JMO tho.
GG

i gotta disagree. the state has the burden of proof in trials not the defense. i'm not saying the defense shouldn't have checked this out because they should have but the state has to bring valid evidence to trial and most don't think a prosecution would lie because they just wouldn't bring that evidence anyway. it's not the defenses job to catch errors made by the state it's just a good idea that they do. an error by the state doesn't get a pass just cus no one caught it. but i think you are right if the defense did object at the time of trial and the judge ruled that the evidence is still good. then i think they have to say that the judge was wrong to rule that way and yadda yadda yadda. i'm rambling sorry. :laugh:

[observer]

There's more to it than that; if it's shown that neither the defense nor the prosecution utilized available info, the appeals court may rule that the evidence cannot be brought in. It was out there for all to use.
She's really not that stupid.
As to the closing, you have to discount both of them as they are not allowed to be used by the jury as anything more than supposition.
These are rules of law I believe.
closings, tho nice, are essentially useless.

same with Glatt's book that everyone keeps talking about, it isn't factual, so forget it.
GG

Hi GG. I understand what you are saying about not being allowed to submit new evidence and not really sure about it, but I think they are seeking a new trial and this evidence could certainly be used in a new trial, right? And what about the convictions that have been overturned because new evidence came to light....this is new evidence as it was presented at the trial, regardless as to whether or not it was around during the trail, it's new because it wasn't presented at the trial...

[GossipGirl]

I think it's rule of appeals, that evidence available at the time of trial that was not used cannot now be brought in. It was up to all concerned to do their homework.
I look at it like a test in HS. If you didn't used you available calculator, you are not allowed to go back and retake the test.
We need an appealate atty to ask this of.
GG

[observer]

There's more to it than that; if it's shown that neither the defense nor the prosecution utilized available info, the appeals court may rule that the evidence cannot be brought in. It was out there for all to use.
She's really not that stupid.
As to the closing, you have to discount both of them as they are not allowed to be used by the jury as anything more than supposition.
These are rules of law I believe.
closings, tho nice, are essentially useless.

same with Glatt's book that everyone keeps talking about, it isn't factual, so forget it.
GG


GG, closings are essential though, especially if the jury bases their decison on the closing, right?

[Pinwheel]

If info available to both was not used or looked into, then she's smart as a whip to say what she did. If it was available and not used, oh well.....
I think that's a rule of appeals, so, she's right in there covering the state's tail.
No?

i don't know if the state guy would agree with that. she's not an employee of the state so she's off the hook. she just shouldn't have answered or just said that they should call the state guy. the info was available to both but that doesn't change the fact that the states experts messed up. she shouldn't have said they had. now if the state responds in their thing and says they didn't make a mistake and pp's statement to the press was wrong how weird will that look.

[Pinwheel]

We need a link to the transcripts. I asked CW to open our old forum in hopes we can see and use all of our old links.
GG

that would be great!!!!!

[observer]

Hi GG. I understand what you are saying about not being allowed to submit new evidence and not really sure about it, but I think they are seeking a new trial and this evidence could certainly be used in a new trial, right? And what about the convictions that have been overturned because new evidence came to light....this is new evidence as it was presented at the trial, regardless as to whether or not it was around during the trail, it's new because it wasn't presented at the trial...


I guess what I'm trying to say is that this existing evidence can be submitted because it is new evidence that was submitted during the trial.

[Pinwheel]

What a shame that the defense didn't bother going down this path a few years ago.
I still am not convinced that info available at trial is allowed in after the fact.
GG

the defense filed a dohicky to try to allow it. we wont know if it worked until they or the state responds. some articles said they have 10 days and others said 30 days. does anyone know how many for sure?

[Dtviewer3]

the defense filed a dohicky to try to allow it. we wont know if it worked until they or the state responds. some articles said they have 10 days and others said 30 days. does anyone know how many for sure?

10 Days to respond to the motions I believe.
I think the 30 days will be for when the appeal is actually filed.

[GossipGirl]

Hi GG. I understand what you are saying about not being allowed to submit new evidence and not really sure about it, but I think they are seeking a new trial and this evidence could certainly be used in a new trial, right? And what about the convictions that have been overturned because new evidence came to light....this is new evidence as it was presented at the trial, regardless as to whether or not it was around during the trail, it's new because it wasn't presented at the trial...

HI Sweetie-Pie,
Most overturned convictions of murderers are because of DNA testing not available at the trial. If she gets a new trial, then, sure, she can bring it in, but that would involve the vacating of all the charges and convictions, not just the murder. So, for instance, if the gun conviction were to stick, it'll be moot.
No,I think if evidence was available and not used, it's not considered new, it's considered able to have been presented and up to the highly educated lawyers to make that correct decision.
If I get charged with being a drug user, and no one gets me a drug test to show I don't use drugs, I cant' get a new hearing after I've been convicted. It is supposed I either have an atty who will tell me to get one or if I am defending myelf, well, that's why I need a lawyer.
If loose-ends and missed evidence are able to be used, one would think all cases would be being retried over and over again. There are rules about this, which mostly involve court time and money taxpayers are laying out. There have to be rules, or it'd be one big Kangaroo Kraziness.
Just like Judge Judy, if you don't bring the proof that you paid off the car, then you owe Grandma the money. End of discussion.
That's how I see it anyway.
We need a lawyer who has access to this answer.
GG

[GossipGirl]

GG, closings are essential though, especially if the jury bases their decison on the closing, right?

They're told not to, whether they do or not is another quesion all together. Closings are really just the lawyers doing a little wrap-up, just as openings are a little intro. It's all about the actual evidence, not what pops out of any of their mouths.

[Pinwheel]

IF it is true she purchased a model 85B2, then yes.

I havent seen the receipt in a couple of years and nobody has been able to locate it on this board.

All I have been able to find was that she had purchased a .38 Taurus Model 85.

i learned my lesson from yesterday and grabbed my glatt book before i left the house. he has it in the middle and the recept says xa53389. if you plug that in on the taurus web page that model 85b2 comes up. scooby doo 'ruh row' again.

[NotAgain]

was ineffective counsel used as a reason for appeal?

[GossipGirl]

i don't know if the state guy would agree with that. she's not an employee of the state so she's off the hook. she just shouldn't have answered or just said that they should call the state guy. the info was available to both but that doesn't change the fact that the states experts messed up. she shouldn't have said they had. now if the state responds in their thing and says they didn't make a mistake and pp's statement to the press was wrong how weird will that look.

If the Rule of Law says that info not used at trial but available to all is not appealable, then that's really what she was indicating. Her saying it as opposed to the new guy is better I think, as she was the prosecuting atty. I'd rather hear Taco say he screwed up also on this than have the appealate atty point it out. We're not hearing that from the defense because they know the Rule of Law on this issue.
The court of appeals does not deal with evidentiary issues, only trial records.
There are other avenues for getting convictions overturned, like asking it to be vacated because of new evidence, etc.
Appeals is just about the trial record itself. Errors in law.
GG

[observer]

They're told not to, whether they do or not is another quesion all together. Closings are really just the lawyers doing a little wrap-up, just as openings are a little intro. It's all about the actual evidence, not what pops out of any of their mouths.

In a perfect world, but this certainly isn't a perfect world....and PP's wasn't simply wrapping things up, in my opinion...but what you say is most certainly correct about CAs

[Dtviewer3]

i learned my lesson from yesterday and grabbed my glatt book before i left the house. he has it in the middle and the recept says xa53389. if you plug that in on the taurus web page that model 85b2 comes up. scooby doo 'ruh row' again.

Where are you pluging that in on the Taurus page?
I only get no item found.

[Pinwheel]

She admitted that both she and the defense missed this, setting the scenario for the evidence to be dismissed. It's not her client that was convicted for leaving a stone unturned, it's Taco's.
He's the one that should have done this homework, especially as he gets GaJillion dollars an hour.
He didn't spend the money on any of it, including this kind of background work his paralegals could have done for him. There was not any money to spend on this, she should have stuck with her old atty, the one PP hired.
GG

the state is responsible for doing their homework first. two rights don't make a wrong. the fact that the def missed a mistake that the pros made doesn't change the fact that the pros made the mistake in the first place. and it doesn't matter if he was a gajillion dollar an hour attorney or a public defender. the burder of proof is on the state. the defense technically doesn't have to do anything at all in the eyes of the law.

[GossipGirl]

In a perfect world, but this certainly isn't a perfect world....and PP's wasn't simply wrapping things up, in my opinion...but what you say is most certainly correct about CAs

I totally agree, she had a moment and ran all the way home with it. She is a much better speaker, uses better inflection in her voice and not the monotone dullness Taco did, and she'd had plenty of time to rewrite it and hit a homerun.
Taco's being such a poor public speaker helped enormously, as did the weather and a dark court day if you recall.
I remember writing on the old board that he needed Toastmasters.
GG

[GossipGirl]

the state is responsible for doing their homework first. two rights don't make a wrong. the fact that the def missed a mistake that the pros made doesn't change the fact that the pros made the mistake in the first place. and it doesn't matter if he was a gajillion dollar an hour attorney or a public defender. the burder of proof is on the state. the defense technically doesn't have to do anything at all in the eyes of the law.

If I get pulled over and have no insurance card, it's not up to the state to call my insurance company and find out if I have it. It's up to me to prove it.
People are wrongly charged all the time, that's why we get a defense atty.
They all made this mistake, but it sits worse on Taco then on PP. MM's conviction did not fall solely on the gun. The burden of proof is on the state, but the defense has to be savvy enough to be on their A game before their client is in prison.
Bags, motive, opportunity, purchasing a gun, lying to the FC judge re: abuse, WM's comp card at the Capp's house, the DE bridge hit, the EZPass hits.....and all the rest are what convicted her. Not just the gun.
Battered women no more prank husband's by moving cars than mobsters write letters to The Trentonian.
This was not just about the gun, so I'm not sure what the future will hold.
GG

[observer]

I totally agree, she had a moment and ran all the way home with it. She is a much better speaker, uses better inflection in her voice and not the monotone dullness Taco did, and she'd had plenty of time to rewrite it and hit a homerun.
Taco's being such a poor public speaker helped enormously, as did the weather and a dark court day if you recall.
I remember writing on the old board that he needed Toastmasters.
GG


And that she got to rewrite it is key, due to the weather and court being closed she got to rewrite it based on Taco's CA. A real advantage.

[Pinwheel]

10 Days to respond to the motions I believe.
I think the 30 days will be for when the appeal is actually filed.

so 10 days for the dohicky and 30 days for the appeal itself? i think i got ya. :thumbup:

[Dtviewer3]

so 10 --snipped---thumbup:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinwheel
i learned my lesson from yesterday and grabbed my glatt book before i left the house. he has it in the middle and the recept says xa53389. if you plug that in on the taurus web page that model 85b2 comes up. scooby doo 'ruh row' again.

Where are you plugging that in on the Taurus page?
I only get no item found.

Thanks in advance......

[Great Dane]

If this was in fact an oversight on JT's part, couldn't part of MM's appeal be that her lawyer didn't explore every venue etc.?

I can't imaging "if" the gun grooves don't match, that the judiciary system would just say, oh well....you had your chance to prove yourself an you didn't, rot in jail....if that's the attitude, it's not just a moral issue...it's a human issue....what if that were you or me, or anyone else?

[Jack&Jill]

Am I missing something....? They have the serial number of the gun MM purchased and wouldn't you think that they could can go back and find out how many grooves were in that gun?????? Yes, some model T38s were made with 6 vs. 5, but they didn't just shoot them down the production line at random and produce some with 6, some 5, etc. Just as there are different style Honda Civics for example, the manufacturer made different model T 38s? To think that B&B did not do their homework on this and have just raised this as a smoke screen is just as ridiculous as PP's closing arument.


EXACTLY , they do know the serial # of the specific GUN bought by MM at the request of her husband because his felon status did not allow him to do so , an addition the witness who was to testify that William told him he wanted his wife to get him a gun because he could not was not allowed to go into detail on this in the trial !

( Absurd ) Showing such partiality when the person on trial should be given every chance to prove their innocence !

This serial # attached to the paper work of the gun MM purchased at the request of William Mcguire is as good as having the GUN in hand as it pertains to the grooves ....unless the slugs were mistaken to have more or less grooves originally , this NEW evidence that was missed by both sides should warrant a new trial at a minimum ......and I 100% beleive the state is going to agree .

[Dtviewer3]

If this was in fact an oversight on JT's part, couldn't part of MM's appeal be that her lawyer didn't explore every venue etc.?

I can't imaging "if" the gun grooves don't match, that the judiciary system would just say, oh well....you had your chance to prove yourself an you didn't, rot in jail....if that's the attitude, it's not just a moral issue...it's a human issue....what if that were you or me, or anyone else?


I think that 'IF' the gun grooves are proven that they didnt/coudnt have come from the gun Melanie purchased, the issues run much deeper. To me that would show someone was ignoring or hiding evidence.

I dont think there is anyway possible the prosecutions expert would have missed this.

[Pinwheel]

Where are you pluging that in on the Taurus page?
I only get no item found.
yea they make you work for it. from the main taurus web pages to to the customer care link on the left side and then go to find my model and it will ask for your serial number. then after you put the serial number it it will pop up in a box on the right side and you click to go to that model's page.

[Great Dane]

I think that 'IF' the gun grooves are proven that they didnt/coudnt have come from the gun Melanie purchased, the issues run much deeper. To me that would show someone was ignoring or hiding evidence.

I dont think there is anyway possible the prosecutions expert would have missed this.

Perhaps once they found out it was a Taurus, .38 they didn't investigate any further? While a scary concept, people need to remember the amount of publicity this case was getting, someone needed to go down for WM's murder...and since the wife (who is always the first suspect) was having an affair, wasn't cooperative, wasn't crying in a fetal position over the loss of her husband....they zoned in on her, and stayed....I can only make assumptions, but I'm not 100% certain that LE ever really pursued anyone besides MM....:confused:

[Pinwheel]

If I get pulled over and have no insurance card, it's not up to the state to call my insurance company and find out if I have it. It's up to me to prove it. (snipped)

:laugh: this is not even close to the same thing! but if you were to go to court to fight that ticket the pros would have to prove that you didn't present your insurance card to the officer that pulled you over. thats the where the burden is. it only applies to court not to the open road. but we should try that next time we get pulled over! :laugh::laugh:

[annalyzer]

Even though I firmly believe that Melanie is behind the whole murder and disposal of her husband's body I have to agree that if it is proven without a doubt that the bullets found in William's body could not have been fired from the gun Melanie purchased then she should get a new trial. I don't think this will happen but I could be wrong. :biggrin:

And if she gets a new trial I believe and hope that her accomplice, if there is one, will be brought to justice. Wouldn't that be sweet. Kill two birds with one stone :thumbsup:

[Jack&Jill]

:laugh: this is not even close to the same thing! but if you were to go to court to fight that ticket the pros would have to prove that you didn't present your insurance card to the officer that pulled you over. thats the where the burden is. it only applies to court not to the open road. but we should try that next time we get pulled over! :laugh::laugh:

So true Pin, no where near the same thing to try and compare the two.

The difference here Is that the EXPERTS were in HOUSE to testify for the prosecution that the slugs that came from MM's gun she purchased MATCHED the slugs that were found in the dead body . The EXPERTS EXPERT testimony was that they were a match .

Come to find out in this NEW EVIDENCE , they were NOT a MATCH at all.

In fact according to the serial number of the GUN MM purchased the difference in the grooves proves that the slugs found in WM body could NOT have come from the GUN MM purchased . This is " HUGE "..

While it can be said that the defense could have rebutted this with their own experts ,I don't know that the burden is placed on the defense in this stance , hence there were EXPERTS that testified in the prosecutions favor that under oath stated the slugs had come from MM's gun.

IMO this should warrant a new trial because it is new evidence , its new evidence because it was NOT discovered at TRIAL ...was it available to them then .................that may be true but WHO is responsible is KEY ...DEFENSE did not testify to this with expert or OTHER ................PROSECUTION however DID and so they need to answer for this and should be part of the new trial and yes ,if sanctions are in order to boot ..................so be it !

[NotAgain]

If this was in fact an oversight on JT's part, couldn't part of MM's appeal be that her lawyer didn't explore every venue etc.?

I can't imaging "if" the gun grooves don't match, that the judiciary system would just say, oh well....you had your chance to prove yourself an you didn't, rot in jail....if that's the attitude, it's not just a moral issue...it's a human issue....what if that were you or me, or anyone else?

her appeal attorney would have to argue ineffective counsel..... as being part of the reason for the appeal....... would her attorney agree that he was ineffective or fall on his sword?

[Dtviewer3]

So true Pin, no where near the same thing to try and compare the two.

The difference here Is that the EXPERTS were in HOUSE to testify for the prosecution that the slugs that came from MM's gun she purchased MATCHED the slugs that were found in the dead body . The EXPERTS EXPERT testimony was that they were a match .

Heres where it gets touchy. The experts never said 'MATCH', they said (and always do) 'consistent with'. Which tecnically is true. But morally, IMO, wrong if found to be the case

Come to find out in this NEW EVIDENCE , they were NOT a MATCH at all.

Maybe. I'll wait for the Pros. response

In fact according to the serial number of the GUN MM purchased the difference in the grooves proves that the slugs found in WM body could NOT have come from the GUN MM purchased . This is " HUGE "..

See above

While it can be said that the defense could have rebutted this with their own experts ,I don't know that the burden is placed on the defense in this stance , hence there were EXPERTS that testified in the prosecutions favor that under oath stated the slugs had come from MM's gun.

Though the burden is with the defense to refute the Pros. evidence, it is NEVER acceptable for the Pros to hide or mis-state evidence. I hope in this case they didnt.

IMO this should warrant a new trial because it is new evidence , its new evidence because it was NOT discovered at TRIAL ...was it available to them then .................that may be true but WHO is responsible is KEY ...DEFENSE did not testify to this with expert or OTHER ................PROSECUTION however DID and so they need to answer for this and should be part of the new trial and yes ,if sanctions are in order to boot ..................so be it !

If it is proven, then a new trial is in order. AND I would like to know if the Prosecution knew about this or if the expert really did miss it.

Response in red.........

[Great Dane]

Furthermore, "if" the gun that MM purchased, could not be the same gun...are we to belive that the actual killer.alternate gun user also had wad cutter bullets? Or was that a mistake too????

[Jack&Jill]

I also believe ( could be wrong ) That in a CRIMINAL CASE the burden is shifted to the prosecution , it was the pros expert that testified under oath to this FALSE information ............


Yeah DT how was that missed ?

[annalyzer]

I also believe ( could be wrong ) That in a CRIMINAL CASE the burden is shifted to the prosecution , it was the pros expert that testified under oath to this FALSE information ............


Yeah DT how was that missed ?

You'd think her great defense team would have checked this out. :unsure:

[BigDude]

her appeal attorney would have to argue ineffective counsel..... as being part of the reason for the appeal....... would her attorney agree that he was ineffective or fall on his sword?

Once reading the appeal, it is quite clear what BB thought about the defense team. I think they thought that they had enough appealable error and didn't need to tack on the ineffective counsel. I think the embrrassment to the defense is going to be pretty good punishment because this case will only highlight that they are not very good attorneys. MM deserves a refund from these two guys.
BIGD

[Topaz]

I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. The webpage says they are constantly improving the models etc.
I think that would necessitate getting manufacturing records. Websites can be pretty poorly maintained and not updated for forensic use.

Secondly, we all know the jury system relies on the attitude of the jury.
Each juror can reject testimony or accept, and also deliver weight to all pieces of evidence. They can nullify an obviously guilty defendent --as in what happened with OJ.

The same is true for the Appeals court. They have experience everyday with evaluating cases that come before them. They will decide what they think is necessary. (not necessarily what any of US think should be done).

One thing that always bothered me was the comments MM made about throwing out WM's extra phones that she found in his car in AC.
Now, why in the world would a wife intending to divorce or leave her husband throw away evidence that could help her in her quest? She certainly held onto that scribbled note of C.Ligosh, for months! Why throw the phones away, when they could be used as proof of her cause?
The links to the other forum that were put up here sort of reminded me of this odd logic by a very "smart" woman. Either it was a total lie, and there were no phones, or those phones prove WM was not as nasty as portrayed here.

It seems like a little thing...but you know, in the Jensen trial, it was a little thing that persuaded 5 NGs to vote guilty in the end. Juries sometimes fixate on some details that others miss. In that case we know what happened because there was a long interview with the jurors after the verdict.

[NotAgain]

snipped

While it can be said that the defense could have rebutted this with their own experts ,I don't know that the burden is placed on the defense in this stance , hence there were EXPERTS that testified in the prosecutions favor that under oath stated the slugs had come from MM's gun.

snipped

bolding is mine.

as a defendent.... could have becomes MUST if pros put on experts.

[Topaz]

And Mr. Taco was reputed to be a master of cross...and he let this one go? One has to wonder why.

[Dtviewer3]

I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. The webpage says they are constantly improving the models etc.
I-snipped-----

I noticed that about the dates also. Thats why its important to get all the facts on this.

One thing that always bothered me was the comments MM made about throwing out WM's extra phones that she found in his car in AC.
Now, why in the world would a wife intending to divorce or leave her husband throw away evidence that could help her in her quest? She certainly held onto that scribbled note of C.Ligosh, for months! Why throw the phones away, when they could be used as proof of her cause?

And also about the phones. Remember that Mel 'claimed' WM tried to call her and she attempted to take a picture of the caller I.D. Also remember that the call was at 1:00 or 2:00am. Mels ez-pass showed she just happened to be driving around in the same area, at the same exact time, as that call originated from. It just screams attempted cover-up.

The links to the other forum that were put up here sort of reminded me of this odd logic by a very "smart" woman. Either it was a total lie, and there were no phones, or those phones prove WM was not as nasty as portrayed here.

-snipped---.

Above.........

[observer]

[QUOTE=Topaz;13182673]I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. The webpage says they are constantly improving the models etc.
I think that would necessitate getting manufacturing records. Websites can be pretty poorly maintained and not updated for forensic use.

Secondly, we all know the jury system relies on the attitude of the jury.
Each juror can reject testimony or accept, and also deliver weight to all pieces of evidence. They can nullify an obviously guilty defendent --as in what happened with OJ.

The same is true for the Appeals court. They have experience everyday with evaluating cases that come before them. They will decide what they think is necessary. (not necessarily what any of US think should be done).

One thing that always bothered me was the comments MM made about throwing out WM's extra phones that she found in his car in AC.
Now, why in the world would a wife intending to divorce or leave her husband throw away evidence that could help her in her quest? She certainly held onto that scribbled note of C.Ligosh, for months! Why throw the phones away, when they could be used as proof of her cause?

She didn't know at the time she was throwing away the phones she would need a defense in a murder case and as for a divorce, MM was not intending to divorce Wm when then, she was waiting until the boys got older to divorce him and take up with Miller

[Jack&Jill]

I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. The webpage says they are constantly improving the models etc.
I think that would necessitate getting manufacturing records. Websites can be pretty poorly maintained and not updated for forensic use.

Secondly, we all know the jury system relies on the attitude of the jury.
Each juror can reject testimony or accept, and also deliver weight to all pieces of evidence. They can nullify an obviously guilty defendent --as in what happened with OJ.

The same is true for the Appeals court. They have experience everyday with evaluating cases that come before them. They will decide what they think is necessary. (not necessarily what any of US think should be done).

One thing that always bothered me was the comments MM made about throwing out WM's extra phones that she found in his car in AC.
Now, why in the world would a wife intending to divorce or leave her husband throw away evidence that could help her in her quest? She certainly held onto that scribbled note of C.Ligosh, for months! Why throw the phones away, when they could be used as proof of her cause?
The links to the other forum that were put up here sort of reminded me of this odd logic by a very "smart" woman. Either it was a total lie, and there were no phones, or those phones prove WM was not as nasty as portrayed here.

It seems like a little thing...but you know, in the Jensen trial, it was a little thing that persuaded 5 NGs to vote guilty in the end. Juries sometimes fixate on some details that others miss. In that case we know what happened because there was a long interview with the jurors after the verdict.


It would make perfect sense in what MM stated as her reasoning when going to AC to hide , move his car as revenge . ( keep in mind here) MM stated she had no intention of leaving WM of her lover and her lover stated the same . It was WM who PICKED up and LEFT , LEFT after having just signed a note for a 500 K home. MM throwing out his many phones ( HOW many phones does one need ? ) coincides with her antagonizing him by hiding his car .

the testimony that MM could not remember the cab co that she took home and has no receipt of proof does not surprise me , when paying in cash and to add how many different cabs are in AC .....but also think about her going back the next day , maybe she didn't take a cab back ,remember THIS all came out AFTER she had been accused and suspect , if someone else took her to get her car of course she would not want to reveal that person as they would be as suspect as she was......


MM was frantic about this obviously she KNEW they were pegging her because she had bought that gun and they were saying she killed him with that gun , MM knew they looked at her because she was having an affair and had bought that gun , anyone else she stated may have given her a ride to and from AC that night in her anger when hiding his car and throwing out his cell phones would have been suspect too ...of course she would conceal that info.

[Pinwheel]

I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. (snipped)

go to the taurus web page and go to customer care and go to find my model. then plug in the serial number xa53389. that's from glatt's book it has a pic of the recept. that serial number will bring up that specific gun manufactured in 2004 not the new model version of the same gun. that should clear it up for you. otherwise we're all gonna get confused with all the new guns vs the old guns.

[annalyzer]

go to the taurus web page and go to customer care and go to find my model. then plug in the serial number xa53389. that's from glatt's book it has a pic of the recept. that serial number will bring up that specific gun manufactured in 2004 not the new model version of the same gun. that should clear it up for you. otherwise we're all gonna get confused with all the new guns vs the old guns.


do you have a link to the receipt? who is Glatt?

[Great Dane]

Topaz,

In regrads to the phones, I always felt as though the entire trip to AC, the throwing away of the phones was MM feeling like WM was leaving her, the same way he did with Marci...I think if she is this narcisitic person that people paint her out to be, she didn't want WM leaving her....not to say that she wanted to be with him, but I think she liked being the one that was having the affair, playing that role....as opposed to being the wife that he left, I think that trip was based entirely around her own ego...JMO

If she didn't kill WM, she didn't know he was dead, didn't realize she was tossing away precious evidence...she just knew he had left and didn't come home....couples, married, unmarried have fights and sometimes people will fall off of the earth for a while, till things simmer down....you are making it seem like she knew he was dead and she knew she was getting rid of evidence....(which may in fact be the case, but I never felt like PP proved her guilty BARD and this new gun thing is making me feel like my gut was right all along)

[Pooh]

Once reading the appeal, it is quite clear what BB thought about the defense team. I think they thought that they had enough appealable error and didn't need to tack on the ineffective counsel. I think the embrrassment to the defense is going to be pretty good punishment because this case will only highlight that they are not very good attorneys. MM deserves a refund from these two guys.
BIGD
You said it, BigDude!! I liked JT at the beginning of this trial but it was clear by the end he was sunk. I think he got too close to the case and couldn't see clearly what he was missing. I think maybe he thought that no matter what, Mel couldn't possibly be convicted given the facts in the case. He was very wrong, of course. I'm only on page 50 of the brief and I have said all along that Mel should have walked right out of that courtroom. This brief just puts it all out there, one reason right after the other. It's appauling the injustice here.

[Jack&Jill]

DTVIEWER3


And also about the phones. Remember that Mel 'claimed' WM tried to call her and she attempted to take a picture of the caller I.D. Also remember that the call was at 1:00 or 2:00am. Mels ez-pass showed she just happened to be driving around in the same area, at the same exact time, as that call originated from. It just screams attempted cover-up.


Didn't someone advise her AFTER she filed for a restraining order to do this ? Take a picture of the caller ID or something ? wow its been so long .I just don't remember that portion that way ?

I think I remember that MM did say he had phoned that night at around that time ,but the picture attempted to be taken with her cell phone of the caller ID was after she filed that restraining order and she said the photo did not come out , but this was days after the phone call at 1 or 2 in the morning the night he went to AC .

Seems this is the case ....

[Great Dane]

I think MM was with her friend or maybe a family meber when she went to AC....I thik she lied about that to authorities to protect anyone else for being considered as an accomplice in WM's murder, which she was being accused of....which is why she can not present receipts for her cab....and while I don't like the fact that she lied....I can whole heartedly understand her need to do so...let's say hypothetically that she went with Selene, the cops would have arrested Selene, between the ride to AC and Lori Thomas saying they were cleaning the bathroom together...it would have been MM setting her own friend up for a fall, for accomanying her to AC....

Just food for thought...

[bugsy]

I have to wonder... That webpage for the gun, discusses the new 2008 model only. One thing to find out is whether the model she bought
in 2004 has the same specs. The webpage says they are constantly improving the models etc.
I think that would necessitate getting manufacturing records. Websites can be pretty poorly maintained and not updated for forensic use.



I could be wrong on this, but I think the note about "new for 2008, we're taking our 85s to the next level", is a generic blurb that Taurus has up for all (or most) of that class of guns.

I find the entire descriptive paragraph repeated on each of the class 85 gun descriptions I look at.

I don't believe it is indicative of advertising any specific changes to the 85b2 on that page.

[Topaz]

yeah sure.... she'd keep a note from CL on a scrap of paper, but would throw away secret phones? She had a secret phone herself! Those phones would be priceless in the future. (if they ever existed that is).

And I tend to think it was a fabrication, like many of the others.

[Pinwheel]

do you have a link to the receipt? who is Glatt?

i'll look on the web for it but glatt is the guy that wrote the book about this. john glatt to have and to kill. i will look and let you know if i find it on the web.

[Great Dane]

Didn't someone advise her AFTER she filed for a restraining order to do this ? Take a picture of the caller ID or something ? wow its been so long .I just don't remember that portion that way ?

I think I remember that MM did say he had phoned that night at around that time ,but the picture attempted to be taken with her cell phone of the caller ID was after she filed that restraining order and she said the photo did not come out , but this was days after the phone call at 1 or 2 in the morning the night he went to AC .

Seems this is the case ....

If I recall her 1st lawyer told her to take a pic, but the picture came out blurry or something....

[Great Dane]

yeah sure.... she'd keep a note from CL on a scrap of paper, but would throw away secret phones? She had a secret phone herself! Those phones would be priceless in the future. (if they ever existed that is).

And I tend to think it was a fabrication, like many of the others.


I think she kept the note from CL to show her friends etc. what kind of person CL really was....like, you think she's so nice...look at this note she wrote about what she would do to her own flesh and blood etc.

And yes, she had secret phones...for her affair!!!!!!!!

[Jack&Jill]

yeah sure.... she'd keep a note from CL on a scrap of paper, but would throw away secret phones? She had a secret phone herself! Those phones would be priceless in the future. (if they ever existed that is).

And I tend to think it was a fabrication, like many of the others.


In this instance pertaining to throwing out the phones it coincides with her same behavior as hiding his car from him , she was MAD at him and I agree with GREAT DANE that MM IMO did like to be the ONE , even though she had DR M on the side she did not like that she had STUCK with WM through all his abuse , signed a mortgage with him and he up and left her that same day basically .

Her keeping that note left by CL is very understandable as the note ,LIST of horrific things to do to their baby sister was shocking and I could see keeping something like that forever ! and back to that as to compare it just goes to show you that she was not thinking a long the lines of protecting herself when she threw out his phones and moved his car she had one thought and that was revenge , to get back at him ....she certainly didn't take the CH out of the glove box .....maybe she never KNEW it was there , that is not something to be left behind , and surely IF she had killed him and the scripts for CH were in her name she would have gotten herself back there to remove that CH from the glove box, she would have been going over her tracks like a hawk , and remembered EVEN AFTER the fact and somehow got back there to get that out of the CAR ....she had opportunity , but IMO its because she did not know it was there .

[Dtviewer3]

go to the taurus web page and go to customer care and go to find my model. then plug in the serial number xa53389. that's from glatt's book it has a pic of the recept. that serial number will bring up that specific gun manufactured in 2004 not the new model version of the same gun. that should clear it up for you. otherwise we're all gonna get confused with all the new guns vs the old guns.


No, that brought up the 2008 model gun.

[observer]

I think she kept the note from CL to show her friends etc. what kind of person CL really was....like, you think she's so nice...look at this note she wrote about what she would do to her own flesh and blood etc.

And yes, she had secret phones...for her affair!!!!!!!!

I keep notes all the time, I just throw them in a basket

[observer]

You said it, BigDude!! I liked JT at the beginning of this trial but it was clear by the end he was sunk. I think he got too close to the case and couldn't see clearly what he was missing. I think maybe he thought that no matter what, Mel couldn't possibly be convicted given the facts in the case. He was very wrong, of course. I'm only on page 50 of the brief and I have said all along that Mel should have walked right out of that courtroom. This brief just puts it all out there, one reason right after the other. It's appauling the injustice here.

Where is the brief that you are reading, I'd love to read it?

[Great Dane]

I keep notes all the time, I just throw them in a basket

Everyone has a pile of junk they let add up and sift through later, but with her close friends like Selene in Brooklyn (I'm not sure how often they saw each other), she could have said....OMG, you have got to see the note CL left when she was here the other night....who does that, who writes a list of things to do to their sister....>more along those lines....lets face it, CL and WM were very close, it's not unreasonable for MM to not be a CL fan, maybe she thought she was a nosy body, or maybe she was opinionated and it cause WM and MM to fight....my point is, I think she happened to save the doodle at the time for one reason and it eneded up being helpful for the case...., or was it unhelpful? either way, it was somehting that she felt she could use to document that moment...

[Jack&Jill]

I keep notes all the time, I just throw them in a basket

My kids wrote me little notes ,others have written me little notes and I saved them too ...if I saw a note like that ...it would have been put with the rest of my notes for sure ! I don't know anyone that would write a note like that though ....TG !

[Pinwheel]

No, that brought up the 2008 model gun.

no that other person bugsy said its on all the model pages. that is the specs for that gun cus your using the serial number which is specific.

[annalyzer]

i'll look on the web for it but glatt is the guy that wrote the book about this. john glatt to have and to kill. i will look and let you know if i find it on the web.


Yeah I have since figured out he is an author. lol But who saw the photo of the receipt in the book?

[Pinwheel]

do you have a link to the receipt? who is Glatt?

annalyzer i found it!! it's in this article i googled. about half way down the page.
http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20090610/UPDATES01/90610001/McGuire+murder+appeal++Bullets+not+from+her+gun

[Pinwheel]

Yeah I have since figured out he is an author. lol But who saw the photo of the receipt in the book?

me! i'm looking at it now! :w00t:

[Dtviewer3]

no that other person bugsy said its on all the model pages. that is the specs for that gun cus your using the serial number which is specific.

Not really.

The description says 'New for 2008', and the specification part, that also says 5 grooves, also lists the gun as 'available now'.

I doubt the gun from 2004 is 'available now'.

Just saying I dont think we can use that page to definitively say the gun purchased years ago is the same as the specs listed on that page.

At this point we dont know........

[Pinwheel]

Not really.

The description says 'New for 2008', and the specification part, that also says 5 grooves, also lists the gun as 'available now'.

I doubt the gun from 2004 is 'available now'.

Just saying I dont think we can use that page to definitively say the gun purchased years ago is the same as the specs listed on that page.

At this point we dont know........

the description at the bottom says new for 2008 they are pushing thier .38s to a new level. thats just a generic advertizing thing. btw it's 2009 now anyway. it doesnt say that this model is new for 2008. and the available now refers to this model still available now. other .38 models have discontinued next to them. i think your just trying to split hairs. :rolleyes:

[Jack&Jill]

Not really.

The description says 'New for 2008', and the specification part, that also says 5 grooves, also lists the gun as 'available now'.

I doubt the gun from 2004 is 'available now'.

Just saying I dont think we can use that page to definitively say the gun purchased years ago is the same as the specs listed on that page.

At this point we dont know........



Would you AGREE that a specific SERIAL number written on a receipt for THE GUN that MM purchased would give specific specifications of the characteristics such has 5 grooves or 6 ..and it would be SAFE to assume that IF the SERIAL number listed for the GUN MM bought does not coincide with the slugs and groove markings of which were recovered from WM body ,then its safe to say HER GUN was not used ?

[Jack&Jill]

Typing in the EXACT serial number "XA53389 " This gun was manufactured in Jan 2004

SPECIFICATIONS
Model: 85B2
Caliber: .38 SPL +P RATED
Capacity: 5
Barrel Length: 2"
Action: DA/SA
Finish: Blue
Grips: Rubber
Weight: 21 oz
Construction: Steel
Frame: Small
Front Sight: Fixed
Rear Sight: Fixed
Trigger Type: Smooth
Length: 0
Width: 1.346"
Height: 4.28"
Rate of Twist: 1:16"
Grooves: 5
Safety: Transfer Bar
UPC: 7-25327-20090-1
Order #: 2-850021
MSRP: $425.00
Status: Available

[Jack&Jill]

The serial # attached to the gun MM bought 4-26-04 is not a mistake , it is the gun she purchased ..........PP states that the only way to prove MM gun was not the GUN is to get the GUN MM bought in hand ............

No ...what could be done is find other receipts of this particular guns serial number that have been sold and shoot a bullet from it and see how many lands and grooves that exact serial number gun has and find several and test each for a good analysis ...MM's gun is not needed in hand to pull this off.

MM's gun would have produced 5 grooves on a slug , the slugs in WM body had 6 grooves , this is a no brainer ..............

[FallenAngel♥]

The serial # attached to the gun MM bought 4-26-04 is not a mistake , it is the gun she purchased ..........PP states that the only way to prove MM gun was not the GUN is to get the GUN MM bought in hand ............

No ...what could be done is find other receipts of this particular guns serial number that have been sold and shoot a bullet from it and see how many lands and grooves that exact serial number gun has and find several and test each for a good analysis ...MM's gun is not needed in hand to pull this off.

MM's gun would have produced 5 grooves on a slug , the slugs in WM body had 6 grooves , this is a no brainer ..............

they don't even have to find the receipts, they can just go to where to bought the gun and they are suppose to keep records of every gun they sale.

[4Life]

The serial # attached to the gun MM bought 4-26-04 is not a mistake , it is the gun she purchased ..........PP states that the only way to prove MM gun was not the GUN is to get the GUN MM bought in hand ............

No ...what could be done is find other receipts of this particular guns serial number that have been sold and shoot a bullet from it and see how many lands and grooves that exact serial number gun has and find several and test each for a good analysis ...MM's gun is not needed in hand to pull this off.

MM's gun would have produced 5 grooves on a slug , the slugs in WM body had 6 grooves , this is a no brainer ..............

No, you are 100% wrong. You need the exact gun to determine if the bullet came from THAT gun. Same model#.serial# etc does not matter, Each gun produces a different marking on the the bullet. If you had 6 38s,same model etc, labeled each on from 1 to 6 and fired each gun, you will be able to determine which bullet came from which gun

[Jack&Jill]

they don't even have to find the receipts, they can just go to where to bought the gun and they are suppose to keep records of every gun they sale.

They do have MM's receipts and I am sure they have others too who bought the same model. EACH gun will have its OWN specific serial number ,but that is ONLY to track the person WHO bought the gun ,such as in a situation like this !

The serial number of the GUN MM purchased has never been in question and see no reason for it to be NOW , the MODEL and serial number from her gun are listed it is clear that her model would produce 5 grooves in a slug after firing. The 6 grooves on the slugs recovered from WM body amounts to , MM's GUN was not the GUN that shot and killed WM !

If MM's GUN was not the gun as it appears here and NOW , then all the OTHER evidence that was circumstantial to begin with should be null and void ,because NONE of it coincides with HER being the killer , not that they found a SPEC of anything , her behavior AFTER WM was found dead does not surprise me , in FACT it just her innocence more so , here is WHY :


MM did not try to hide the fact she was NOT upset that her husband was DEAD , she had been having an affair with a Doctor , she did not love her husband and stayed with him for the childrens sake.

She put her own happiness on hold for the sake of her children .....

IF SHE had murdered her husband surely she would have played the role of grieving widow , she NEVER DID .............because she did not kill him and didn't know she was going to be the main suspect .....had she killed him she would have ACTED the PART ...


You know ...shed a few tears ......lay low .....nope ...she had no idea what would unravel before her eyes and the world.