Sitcoms Online - Main Page / Message Boards - Main Page / News Blog / Photo Galleries / DVD Reviews / Buy TV Shows on DVD and Blu-ray

View Today's Active Threads / View New Posts / Mark All Boards Read / Chit Chat Board


Unsolved Mysteries Online Main Page / Message Board / Show History / Episode Guide (1987-2002) / Expanded Episode Guide #2 / Expanded Episode Guide #3 / Case Updates / Wiki / Official Site / Related Links / True Crime Shows Message Board / All Other Cases Message Board / Buy The Best of Unsolved Mysteries DVD / Buy Unsolved Mysteries - The Ultimate Collection DVD

Unsolved Mysteries: Original Robert Stack Episodes - The Complete First Season

Watch or Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Original Robert Stack Episodes - The Complete First Season on Amazon Instant Video
/
Season 2
/ Season 3 / Season 4 /
Season 5
/ Season 6 / Season 7 /
Season 8
/ Season 9 / Season 10 /
Season 11
/ Season 12 / Watch on YouTube

Unsolved Mysteries with Dennis Farina Episodes

Watch or Buy Unsolved Mysteries with Dennis Farina - The Complete First Season Episodes on Amazon Instant Video
/ Season 2 / Season 3 / Season 4 / Season 5 / Season 6 / Season 7 / Season 8 / Watch on YouTube


Unsolved Mysteries: UFOs

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: UFOs DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Ghosts

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Ghosts DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Miracles

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Miracles DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Bizarre Murders

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Bizarre Murders DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Psychics

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Psychics DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Strange Legends

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Strange Legends DVD Set

Sitcoms Online Message Boards - Forums  

Go Back   Sitcoms Online Message Boards - Forums > Unsolved Mysteries

Notices

SitcomsOnline.com News Blog Headlines Twitter Facebook Instagram RSS

Fri-Yay: Primetime Emmy Predictions for Comedy; Paramount Heads to Paris for New Comedy
Pop TV Renews Schitt's Creek for Sixth and Final Season, Fifth Season Marathon to Air on Sept. 21; HBO Max Revives The Boondocks
NBC Streaming Service Peacock Sets Reboots of Saved by the Bell & Punky Brewster; The Big Bang Theory Coming to HBO Max, While TBS Renews Through 2028
ABC Sets Reunions of Cheers, The Drew Carey Show, Girlfriends, Charmed, Castle and More; NBC Renews Titan Games for Season 2
Nick Slates Are You Afraid of the Dark? Premiere; Spectrum Originals Drama Goes Back Into Production for Season 2 in 2020
Sitcom Stars on Talk Shows; This Week in Sitcoms (Week of September 16, 2019)
SitcomsOnline Digest: Party of Five Reboot Coming in January; Jenna Fischer and Angela Kinsey to Reunite for Office Ladies Podcast


New on DVD/Blu-ray (July/August/September)

Life in Pieces - The Complete Fourth Season The Good Place - The Complete Third Season Brooklyn Nine-Nine - Season Six Young Sheldon - The Complete Second Season Modern Family - The Complete Tenth Season

07/08 - Man with a Plan - Season Two
07/09 - Broad City - Season 5
07/09 - Broad City - The Complete Series
07/09 - Life in Pieces - The Complete Fourth Season
07/09 - Speechless - The Complete Third Season
07/16 - Eight Is Enough - The Complete First Season
07/17 - The Practice (1976) - The Complete Series (WBShop.com)
07/23 - Brockmire - The Complete First Season
07/23 - What I Like About You - The Complete First Season
07/30 - The Good Place - The Complete Third Season
08/06 - Caroline in the City - The Third Season
08/06 - Caroline in the City - The Fourth Season
08/13 - I Love Lucy - Colorized Collection
08/13 - Leave it to Beaver - Seasons One and Two
08/20 - Brooklyn Nine-Nine - Season Six
08/27 - Baskets - The Complete Season Four
08/27 - It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - The Complete Thirteenth Season
09/03 - Bob's Burgers - The Complete 9th Season
09/03 - Fresh Off the Boat - The Complete Fifth Season
09/03 - The Goldbergs - The Complete Sixth Season
09/03 - Single Parents - The Complete Season One
09/03 - Young Sheldon - The Complete Second Season
09/04 - What We Do in the Shadows - The Complete First Season
09/10 - American Dad! - Volume 14
09/10 - The Jetsons - The Complete Original Series (Blu-ray) (WBShop.com)
09/11 - My Three Sons - The Fourth Season - Volume One
09/11 - My Three Sons - The Fourth Season - Volume Two
09/17 - Friends - The Complete Series (25th Anniversary)
09/17 - Modern Family - The Complete Tenth Season
More TV DVD Releases / DVD Reviews Archive / SitcomsOnline Digest


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-02-2010, 10:50 PM   #91
wiseguy182
Member
Senior Member
 
wiseguy182's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 11, 2006
Location: Wendy's salad bar
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by egswanso
With all the speculation, this much is clear - they D.A., who had at their disposal, ALL the evidence (not just a television segment) dismissed the case against McClure WITH prejudice (i.e., forever).

This is far stronger evidence in my mind that he didn't do it then all the rank speculation in this thread. Could he have done it? Sure, I suppose he could have - but there is no EVIDENCE he did so.

Motive - the only identifiable motive is 5K in insurance money. This isn't a very strong motive, and neither the amount or timing of the insurance policy makes it very suspicious, frankly. Positing on some argument, etc. between Tim and his mother is pure speculation and contradicted by the testimony of friends and relatives as to the relationship between the two.

Means - The police could find absolutely no link between the murder weapon and McClure. None.

Opportunity - There is, perhaps, a window of opportunity for McClure to have committed the crime, although since an exact time of death isn't available, it's impossible to really pin down a timeline with much certainty.

Here's the thing, let's presume McClure did it - and for those who think he did, explain this:

1. Why make up an alibi much easier to negate (in the casino) vs. saying he was up in his room watching TV or "with" his wife?

2. Where's any link to the murder weapon? It's safe to assume, I think, that the police could find nothing to indicate McClure (1) owned a gun; (2) purchased a gun; (3) had a gun in his possession.

3. Why even make up the whole story as to the driving her route looking for her purse/car/her? He could have just as easily said he drove the highway looking to see if she broke down. How do we know he really checked "every" casino between Lake Tahoe and Reno? Did he have an exhaustive list checking them off one-by-one, or did he simply not stop at some ones (because he didn't know they were there or didn't see them) and only after-the-fact blame god for not going to that one.

While law enforcement isn't perfect; it's hard to believe they couldn't make a case against McClure if the evidence was actually there. The simple fact is, it's just not and all the speculation in the world can't change that.
well you are right there is no evidence that he did it, but that's the same reason Jule Caylor, Donnie Hansen, Steve Marfeo, Judy Groezinger, Steve Page and Paul Pollis were never arrested for murder. No evidence, but an overwhelming circumsantial case.

Regarding motive, I think it's possible that Terri didn't approve of Tim's wife and there was an argument over that. Or perhaps one of them had a gambling addiction and there was an argument over that. I'll have to disagree with you strongly about the timing. The insurance policy had just been taken out months before, and it was on Tim's wedding night and he may have had some hefty expenses out of that. And why do you say that the insurance motive isn't a very strong motive? Seems like a strong one to me.

And I'll have to strongly disagree with you that there was no opportunity. Remember, there is an entire 8 hour block of time that Tim can't be accounted for, and his wife has a 6 hour block of time.

Regarding your questions, I can't answer those because I don't know what was going through Tim's mind. I think it's something that Tim not only can't remember which dance halls they visited. But assuming he can't remember them, it would seem like he could just drive around town and figure out which ones if he can't remember the names, but he couldn't even do that.
wiseguy182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2010, 11:23 PM   #92
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

This is all just speculation. I would hope speculation can never overcome reasonable doubt. Remember, the state must show, through clear and convincing evidence, someone is guilty, not use speculation, conjecture and assumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peachysquirt21
As to the credit card, not only did the woman Tim talk too got the date wrong, she also got his words mixed up on why he was canceling it. This according to Tim. There is no way someone is gonna get both of these mixed up.
The note says the mother was deceased, not murdered. It's the date of the call that would be important and there's no apparent corroboration of the 14th. If there was, that would certainly be important.

Quote:
Why the need to cancel the card so soon? I mean if it was my mom who had dissapeared & then turn up dead, I would not cancel the card. I would leave it active in case the person who did this tried to use the card or someone else finding it & trying to use it. It could help in solving who had done this.
See my previous post. Putting a cancel and/or stolen flag on the card may mark it just as well. If you left the card active w/i no flags, it could just be used w/o worry by the killer.

Quote:
When all is said & done you have to ask yourself what are the odds? Tim & his new bride have gone there separate ways for several hours & in this time frame his mom ends up dead & they really have no alibi.
No question that there was a window of opportunity. Having "no alibi" isn't really accurate though, he has an alibi, it just can't be corroborated. This, in itself, isn't that unusual; most of us have multiple hours every day where we can't prove (beyond our own statements) where we are.

Quote:
Tim cancels the credit card but the credit card lady not only gets the date wrong when he canceled, she also got it wrong on why he was canceling the card.
Not really, she gets the date wrong. Change the date from the 14th to the 17th and her note is completely accurate.

Quote:
Tim completely fails a polygraph but his wife only fails one question & the most important question of them all- Do you know who murdered Terri McClure.
Polygraphs are next to worthless and the description of the test that Tim gives suggests it was not administered properly anyway.

Quote:
The one place he decided not to look for his mom cause of a feeling he got, she actually turns up.
After the fact rationalization. There's no real proof he checked "every place" and he could have just has easily have missed that casino and then, realizing it was where she was found, thanks god for making him miss it, so he doesn't find her.

Besides, the whole action of checking the casinos, etc. makes much less sense if he's the killer; all he's doing/did is draw suspicion to himself.

Quote:
That this happens on the happiest night of his life, his wedding night. To me those are very slim odds this happening with him being innocent.
There's no doubt there is some circumstantial evidence that could support McClure being guilty; the problem with circumstantial evidence is that it's equally supportive of innocent, which, of course, must be presumed. Given the actions of the D.A., there was no actual evidence supporting a case against McClure. That is much more damning then circumstantial assumptions and speculation.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2010, 11:29 PM   #93
kadrmas15
Retired from Board 03/03/11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 11, 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,892
Default

Hmm, I actually disagree, this case is highly different from any of those in terms of who was killed (in all the above instances it was the man's wife) in this case it was the man's mother. Again, this case is so strange. However in some of the other cases, like in Jule Caylor's case, there was blood found, Mark Nichols, there was blood found. Donnie Hansen, do not even get me started on that, I am not a fan of prosecutors at all but I will say they had a solid case there and I am surprised they lost it. The only thing I can really think of is the prosecutor in that case got arrogant and thought he had a slum dunk case so he did not try as hard and little things slip by.

However in the Tim McClure case, while I am not saying the guy is for sure innocent, (when I say innocent I mean he did not kill his mother and not just innocent in the eyes of the law as in not guilty) but there were problems here in this case. Regardless of Tim not being around for X amount of hours and yes it looks bizarre to say the least, but how many times have we all been alone for hours out of contact and out of sight? I am sure it has happened to all of us.

Now granted the above comparison is not totally fair because this was Tim's wedding night. I have never heard of someone going alone gambling for two hours right after they get married. But that said this case while circumstantial is just that, circumstantial. In fact it is so circumstantial the prosecutor would not go for it without more and in this instance I have to applaud the prosecutor. Failing a polygraph, I am a bit weary about polygraphs. There is a reason why they are mostly inadmissible as evidence and it is because they are not accurate enough. Polygraphs do not detect lies, they detect physical responses to questions such as perspiration rate, blood pressure, pulse rate, etc. The common theory being people's heart rate and blood pressure go up when they lie, especially about something serious and their perspiration rate goes up. However that is not always the case and there are some people that do not have a conscience thus they can lie constantly and they would pass a polygraph because it does not bother them to lie. Now granted a majority of people that pass polygraphs are telling the truth and a majority of people that fail the polygraphs are actually lying. But that stands more to reason than it does to the accuracy of the machine.

I will say, wiseguy presents an interesting theory. A fight between Tim McClure and his mother over Tim's wife and Terri McClure possibly not be approving of his new mother in law. This could be possible. It could also be that Terri McClure maybe did not want Tim to move away at all and certainly did not want him to get married fearing he would forget about her? Sounds sappy but you never know, people have been known to feel weird things and do weird things. Just a very strange case that was pretty much bungled from the start hence why Tim will never be charged with it again.

I will say, I think you could get convictions on a lot of the guys above, but on Tim McClure I am not so sure. Basically though when a prosecutor does not charge in a case like this, it is either because they are highly ethical or it is they are afraid the chances are too great that there will be an acquittal.
kadrmas15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2010, 11:36 PM   #94
kadrmas15
Retired from Board 03/03/11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 11, 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,892
Default

Eswango, overall I agree with your opinion. I too am weary of circumstantial evidence because it is too easy to twist, fabricate or manipulate to fit a prosecutors 'theory' of what happened in a given case. Look at all the innocent people proven innocent over the years, practically all were convicted originally based purely on circumstantial evidence or they were convicted on physical evidence that was misinterpreted or contaminated, or they were convicted because of lying or mistaken witnesses or they were convicted because of a false confession. In fact 25 percent of the men proven innocent as it turns out had originally confessed to the crime they were ultimately convicted of. Think of Juan Rivera in Illinois, he made a false confession and last year was convicted again and sentenced to life in prison for the third time because the jury could not get past the confession even though he was excluded as being the donor of the DNA found inside the 11 year old girl he was accused of murdering.
kadrmas15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 12:01 AM   #95
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
well you are right there is no evidence that he did it, but that's the same reason Jule Caylor, Donnie Hansen, Steve Marfeo, Judy Groezinger, Steve Page and Paul Pollis were never arrested for murder. No evidence, but an overwhelming circumsantial case.
The circumstances and facts of most of those cases are very different and it's a false analogy to really compare them. The biggest problem with most (not all) of those cases is lack of a body, which makes proving murder very difficult.

Quote:
Regarding motive, I think it's possible that Terri didn't approve of Tim's wife and there was an argument over that. Or perhaps one of them had a gambling addiction and there was an argument over that. I'll have to disagree with you strongly about the timing. The insurance policy had just been taken out months before, and it was on Tim's wedding night and he may have had some hefty expenses out of that. And why do you say that the insurance motive isn't a very strong motive? Seems like a strong one to me.
Sure, it's possible. Anything's possible, but there's just no evidence of it. If she really didn't approve of the wedding, why would she go in the first place? Nor is it unusual for elderly people to have life insurance. If the policy was large, or taken out a week before the murder, that would be suspicious, but a lower-middle-income elderly lady taking out a small life insurance policy just isn't that uncommon or unusual.

The amount of the policy combined with no apparent evidence of financial problems makes it a weak motive. For insurance to be a strong motive for murder, I'd want to see: (1) a policy amount disproportionate to the person's worth - a million dollar policy on a poor homemaker, for instance; (2) it was purchased right before the murder; (3) some element of fraud and/or financial malfeasance. None of that appears here, despite, no doubt, the police searching for it.

Quote:
And I'll have to strongly disagree with you that there was no opportunity. Remember, there is an entire 8 hour block of time that Tim can't be accounted for, and his wife has a 6 hour block of time.
I never said there was no opportunity. McClure could have had opportunity. The segment doesn't say no-one saw that "dancing until dawn," so I might disagree as to the timeframe unaccounted for, but even a couple hours could, conceivably, been enough time to commit the murder.

Quote:
Regarding your questions, I can't answer those because I don't know what was going through Tim's mind. I think it's something that Tim not only can't remember which dance halls they visited. But assuming he can't remember them, it would seem like he could just drive around town and figure out which ones if he can't remember the names, but he couldn't even do that.
Nor can I, and, of course, criminals often do stupid things and make up needlessly complex stories. Regardless, there's just no actual evidence McClure did it.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 12:14 AM   #96
wiseguy182
Member
Senior Member
 
wiseguy182's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 11, 2006
Location: Wendy's salad bar
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by egswanso
No question that there was a window of opportunity. Having "no alibi" isn't really accurate though, he has an alibi, it just can't be corroborated. This, in itself, isn't that unusual; most of us have multiple hours every day where we can't prove (beyond our own statements) where we are.

Not really, she gets the date wrong. Change the date from the 14th to the 17th and her note is completely accurate.
you can't prove that, that's speculation, like you were talking about earlier. You can't prove that the credit card lady is wrong any more than I can prove Tim is wrong

The alibi is just so strange. He's at dance halls and casinos in one of the biggest cities in the state, and yet nobody can account for his alibi for an entire 8 hours, or his wife for 6. they must have ran into dozens upon dozens if not hundreds of people that night. And with Tim's distinctive appearance, it just seems unlikely.
wiseguy182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 12:23 AM   #97
wiseguy182
Member
Senior Member
 
wiseguy182's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 11, 2006
Location: Wendy's salad bar
Posts: 6,907
Default

It's very easy to say "credit card lady got the wrong date" and just leave it at that. I think the issue is a lot more complex than that. For starters, the credit card lady is certain she got the date right. Not maybe or perhaps, but certain. And if this is a person that has been on the job for decades, I'm especially inclined to believe she's right, she has no horse in this race. I don't know the details of her job, but perhaps people at that job are required to put all of their day's work in a packet (like I am), and if that memo was in the packet for the 14th, I believe Tim called on the 14th.
wiseguy182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 01:19 AM   #98
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
you can't prove that, that's speculation, like you were talking about earlier. You can't prove that the credit card lady is wrong any more than I can prove Tim is wrong

The alibi is just so strange. He's at dance halls and casinos in one of the biggest cities in the state, and yet nobody can account for his alibi for an entire 8 hours, or his wife for 6. they must have ran into dozens upon dozens if not hundreds of people that night. And with Tim's distinctive appearance, it just seems unlikely.
That's absolutely correct. The proof would be the phone records, which should have existed on one, if not both, ends. I am only assuming the date of the 14th can't be corroborated based largely upon the D.A. dismissing the case and the otherwise damning nature of such evidence, if corroborated.

Yes, it is unusual, although not necessarily damning, since you have to figure his appearance wasn't as unusual in the day (big hair!) as it would be now, other patrons were likely to have been drunk and/or not paying attention to other folks and gamblers tend to focus on their machine, not who's around them. It's also not clear how quickly (if at all) the crime and search for witnesses was publicized; this would certainly make a difference in finding witnesses, especially given what would presumable be a fairly transient crowd. I know personally, I might remember someone I saw at a busy bar or club the night before, MAYBE even a few days if there was something odd about them, but longer than that? I'd be as skeptical of anyone coming forward years later claiming to have seen them as to the lack of anyone.

I am surprised there were no surveillance tapes in the casino, but if, as others have discussed, these were older casinos and it was 25+ years ago, I guess it's not shocking.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 01:28 AM   #99
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
It's very easy to say "credit card lady got the wrong date" and just leave it at that. I think the issue is a lot more complex than that. For starters, the credit card lady is certain she got the date right. Not maybe or perhaps, but certain. And if this is a person that has been on the job for decades, I'm especially inclined to believe she's right, she has no horse in this race. I don't know the details of her job, but perhaps people at that job are required to put all of their day's work in a packet (like I am), and if that memo was in the packet for the 14th, I believe Tim called on the 14th.
Her certainty is irrelevant, frankly. I've dealt with many, many people who were "certain" of facts and testified as such, but they were proven clearly and absolutely wrong. It doesn't imply any malice on her part, just normal human failings.

Evidence of office procedures could have been used to corroborate the date; I am assuming police investigated this fully and found no corroboration, given the dismissal of the case.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 01:39 AM   #100
wiseguy182
Member
Senior Member
 
wiseguy182's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 11, 2006
Location: Wendy's salad bar
Posts: 6,907
Default

I think we all have gotten days mixed up at one point. But to be off 3 whole days? Someone would really have to be out of it to be off 3 days.

For the record, when I first watched this case many years ago, I started off thinking Tim was innocent, because that's what the segment wants you to believe. It's not a "is Tim guilty or innocent" case, but rather a "Tim's looking for someone to clear his name" case, and they mention his relationship with his mother. Those are basically the 2 first things you hear about this case, so that seems to be the direction they're going for. But once the facts of the case presented themselves, my opnion swung so wildly in the other direction I'm surprised I didn't suffer from whiplash
wiseguy182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 02:07 AM   #101
peachysquirt21
Member
Forum Regular
 
peachysquirt21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 27, 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
But once the facts of the case presented themselves, my opnion swung so wildly in the other direction I'm surprised I didn't suffer from whiplash
LMAO couldn't help but laugh at that...
peachysquirt21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 02:13 AM   #102
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
I think we all have gotten days mixed up at one point. But to be off 3 whole days? Someone would really have to be out of it to be off 3 days.

For the record, when I first watched this case many years ago, I started off thinking Tim was innocent, because that's what the segment wants you to believe. It's not a "is Tim guilty or innocent" case, but rather a "Tim's looking for someone to clear his name" case, and they mention his relationship with his mother. Those are basically the 2 first things you hear about this case, so that seems to be the direction they're going for. But once the facts of the case presented themselves, my opnion swung so wildly in the other direction I'm surprised I didn't suffer from whiplash
It was a Friday to a Monday, though. I know I've been more likely to put the wrong date in after a weekend.

For me, at least, the segment didn't really lead to me one conclusion or the other; McClure doesn't come across as a total scumbag, but much of what he said is the same trite that every "innocent" person cries about, regardless of their actual innocence, and the story told by the segment gives rise to the circumstantial questions that many have focused upon. I certainly wouldn't say it's a pro-McClure whitewash many "final appeals" are.

The strongest reason I don't think he was the murderer has nothing to do with the segment directly, but is because the D.A., with all the evidence at his/her disposal, came to that conclusion and dismissed the case with prejudice. Essentially, you have the police focusing in on one suspect, gathering all the evidence they can to make their case against him, and the case and evidence is still so deficient the D.A. doesn't even bother taking it to a jury. I suppose it's possible the police and/or D.A. are totally incompetent, but that's not something I usually presume without good cause.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 09:36 PM   #103
justins5256
Member
Senior Member
 
justins5256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 08, 2002
Posts: 3,839
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiseguy182
For the record, when I first watched this case many years ago, I started off thinking Tim was innocent, because that's what the segment wants you to believe. It's not a "is Tim guilty or innocent" case, but rather a "Tim's looking for someone to clear his name" case, and they mention his relationship with his mother. Those are basically the 2 first things you hear about this case, so that seems to be the direction they're going for. But once the facts of the case presented themselves, my opnion swung so wildly in the other direction I'm surprised I didn't suffer from whiplash
Woah, I'm going to have to disagree there. Personally, I think the segment makes Tim look guilty and I don't feel UM did him a lot of favors. I really have to wonder what the producers thought going into this. Did they think he was guilty and figure they would let him dig his own grave? Usually on "Final Appeal", and the like we get some alternate theories to mull around. In this, we don't get so much as a re-enactment of a robbery type scenario that could leave the viewer with some inkling as to what else may have occurred.
justins5256 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 10:34 PM   #104
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
The strongest reason I don't think he was the murderer has nothing to do with the segment directly, but is because the D.A., with all the evidence at his/her disposal, came to that conclusion and dismissed the case with prejudice. Essentially, you have the police focusing in on one suspect, gathering all the evidence they can to make their case against him, and the case and evidence is still so deficient the D.A. doesn't even bother taking it to a jury. I suppose it's possible the police and/or D.A. are totally incompetent, but that's not something I usually presume without good cause.

That just means they don;t have any evidence to convict. That doesn;t mean there couldn't be evidence found later to convict Tim McClure.

There is a big difference between being a detective and lawyer.

The detective doesn;t really care who did it, as long a someone is arrested for the crime.

Ultimately the defense lawyer could care less who did the crime...just as long their side wins in court. Defense Lawyers could care less if someone got away with murder and killed several people later on. The defense lawyer just wants to make sure his client is out of jail or serving the least amount of time possible.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 12:21 AM   #105
kadrmas15
Retired from Board 03/03/11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 11, 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,892
Default

Well yeah Mastermind, prosecutors want to do the same in convicting someone regardless of who it is all they care about is the conviction. Mind you it is not unethical for a defense attorney to get a person who thinks he/she thinks is guilty 'off the hook' however it is unethical for a prosecutor to pursue a conviction against a person they are not sure is guilty. That is because the prosecutor has the burden of proof not the defense attorney.
kadrmas15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:58 PM.


Frequently Asked Questions

1) How do I contact Unsolved Mysteries with information on segments?

If you any information on cases, you can contact them via:

Website: www.unsolved.com

Contact form on official Unsolved Mysteries site

Please note that their old mailing address and 1-800 phone number no longer work.


2) Where can I watch Unsolved Mysteries?

Unsolved Mysteries is available for streaming on Amazon Instant Video, YouTube and Hulu.


Although the administrators and moderators of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards, nor vBulletin Solutions Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message. The owners of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.