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: Fall Sitcom Slate Check-In: ABC; Antenna TV Acquires The Facts of Life, Diff'rent Strokes, Who's the Boss? and More
Dancing with the Stars Cast for Season 28; Lilly Singh Gets NBC Primetime Special
Decades Celebrates Bob Newhart's 90th Birthday with Big Marathon; Wanda Sykes & Mike Epps Get Netflix Sitcom
James Corden Gets Extended by CBS; Freeform's Halloween House Returns for 31 Nights of Halloween
Silicon Valley Returns for Final Season; Netflix Gears Up for Elvis Animated Comedy
Sitcom Stars on Talk Shows; This Week in Sitcoms (Week of August 19, 2019)
SitcomsOnline Digest: Paley Center to Honor TV Legends; NBC Developing St. Elmo's Fire TV Series


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

The Brady Bunch - 50th Anniversary The Brady-est TV & Movie Collection Will & Grace (The Revival) - Season Two The Good Place - The Complete Third Season Life in Pieces - The Complete Fourth Season Brooklyn Nine-Nine - Season Six

06/04 - The Brady Bunch - 50th Anniversary The Brady-est Brady Bunch TV & Movie Collection
06/18 - Will & Grace (The Revival) - Season Two (Blu-ray)
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
More TV DVD Releases / DVD Reviews Archive / SitcomsOnline Digest


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-26-2009, 10:30 AM   #106
notwhatuthink
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 26, 2009
Location: london
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justicefirst
Acquittal is really the only thing these jurors could have chose!!

That doesn't mean innocent, that is a very big concept that is often missed in this Justice system. If there is reasonable doubt you can't convict someone. So many people in this world and on this thread are so ready to convict, to point the finger, to find guilty. This is nothing new!!! For all of those who felt that Stuart should have been convicted PLEASE watch the movie "Twelve Angry Men" with Peter Fonda. It may very well change the way you feel. Don't get me wrong I would have no problem voting for a conviction even on circumstantial evidence if it is compelling enough. But in this case I'm sorry too many questions for example;

1. Motive? Any motive offered in this thread is strictly supposition and conjecture. The prosecution offered really no motive for Stuart.
2. The only real evidence was the DNA which was considered by an expert and colleague of the Doctor who did the evaluation as inconclusive at best and most probably exculpatory. Let's assume the dried semen was Stuarts, that only proves he had sex with her since the last time she bathed it doesn't prove he stabbed her 81 times. It would prove he was an adulterer, a liar, and a cad but it doesn't prove he is a murderer. More on the retest later.
3. The arresting officer testified on TV that he saw no cut or scratch marks on Stuarts hands or face while he was handcuffing him and was directed to look for those things when arresting the suspect. Hmmmm Then when he brought it up with his superior he was stonewalled with the words, we got our guy!!!
4. There were at least 4 eye-witnesses that put Stuart miles away as late in the day as 12:30 with his truck. The white truck was seen at the crime scene from 10:00 am till 2:00 pm. How could Stuart be in two places at once.
5. There was another suspect that had been seen with Chystal within 24 hours and also had been driving an exact same kind of truck as Stuarts and was linked to Chrystal and her brother. The police decided not to investigate that lead because the D.A. said the other suspects truck had a crack in the windshield. They never allowed the eye-witnesses that saw the truck see a picture of both trucks. They assumed that they would have remembered every little detail of the truck. Give me a break, would you? Do you study every detail of every vehicle you see? Coincidentally that truck was immediately sold to a junk yard and scrapped. Hmmm

6. This other suspect was not investigated although many in the community pointed the finger his way including his ex-wife who said he had came at her with scissors. He drove the exact same kind of truck, he was seen with the victim the day before, he had a history of violence including sex crimes and stabbing someone. He was also an informant for the Police. Hmmmm The plot thickens. Could this be the reason this guy wasn't investigated? Could this be why there were so many missing reports as confessed by the DA? Could this be why the arresting officer stated he felt that Stuart was being "railroaded"? Could this other suspect have the goods on someone in law enforcement? Could he have said " If I'm going down your going down"? Could this be a motive for someone in law enforcement to plant more of Sturats DNA for the retest? Wouldn't be the first time!!!!

7. Stuart was gainfully employed, regularly attended church did not have any criminal record, had a pregnant wife. There was not one speck of evidence that he was in the house. The semen could have been placed in her pubic hair at a different location. It is bizarre that not one hair or blood or skin or anything actually puts him at the scene of the crime. Conversely there are eye-witnesses who talked to him miles away at the time of the crime.

I'm not asserting that Stuart is 100% innocent but with all of these questions and more I just can't fit in this reply but with all of these question it is shocking to me that the jury came back with ta conviction but Stuart wouldn't be the first. It is the mentality of our society. Kill them all and let God sort it out. Watch "Twelve Angry men" and "Runaway Jury" and if you are ever on a Jury don't be persuaded, consoled, or bullied. Take the time to go over all of the evidence sort it out. NEVER blindly believe Prosecutors or defense attorney's. They will both lie and cheat to get what they want.

I personally feel the defense attorney for Stuart in this case should be disbarred and spend some time in prison, the only reason I can see that Stuart didn't fire this person is was confident the Justice system would work and he win and he was extremely naive.
mr heaton is inocent period.the guy who they got told done it them 2 out of town ex cops asked him qs...within 10 secs i read hes body lingo hes guilty as oj is.....rememmber john gacy? when the cops went to hes home asking qs? he started just like that old fart acting and telling them hes a good person to the community..........mr heaton did not kill that poor girl.but hes going to die in jail because of corrupt cops ...bastards
notwhatuthink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 10:51 AM   #107
justins5256
Member
Senior Member
 
justins5256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 08, 2002
Posts: 3,835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by notwhatuthink
mr fuji your a ****ing idiot .you got no life to bet....how can you bet your life on it?was you there when that ratt ex veitnam vet killed her.not mr heaton.i mean that drug dealer who was a informant for the copson the case.to tell you the truth your a ****ing mutt
Well, this poster's credibility just went out the window...
justins5256 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 01:56 PM   #108
TracyLynnS
Don't Look Up
Senior Member
 
TracyLynnS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 07, 2009
Posts: 3,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justins5256
Well, this poster's credibility just went out the window...
Oh jeez, the run on sentences, the lack of punctuation, the inappropriate punctuation, the spelling errors (how does one master the spelling of Vietnam but fail to spell Rat?), the lack of spaces between words or sentences....

It's physically painful to read. It hurts my eyes and brings on a migraine from the effort of attempting to comprehend the ideas the writer is trying to convey.

And how about the poster right before him? We have to discount DNA matches in crimes now because it's only 99.9% accurate, and that's not good enough to ensure that we've got the right perp.
TracyLynnS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2009, 08:26 PM   #109
george ramos
Member
Frequent Poster
 
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Posts: 145
Default

Stuart Heaton just launched his official website. Forgive me if this link is old. I don't visit this forum that much anymore. Hell, I just found out last November that Unsolved Mysteries is back on the air.

http://stuartheaton.com/wrongman.html
george ramos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2009, 11:41 PM   #110
ps
Member
First Time Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 07, 2009
Posts: 1
Default Heaton seems to be lying to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by notwhatuthink
they went to talk to him in hes trailor...the first 10 seconds of hes body lingo give him away (he did kill that poor 16 year old girl...(not stuart heaton)..
Really? I've been watching shows like this for a while now just because I'm trying to practice my body language reading skills after doing research on the topic. I went into this episode assuming he was innocent (why else would they do the show? I've only seen one episode of "the investigators" before - but figured it's not an interesting show if they show how a guilty guy is guilty...).

After watching Stuart Heaton's interview, I no longer had that feeling at all. He had microexpressions and body language of deception, especially at certain questions. I was actually very surprised when he finished, because I was sure the show was going to come out later and prove he was innocent, but I couldn't shake the feeling that he was a total liar.

Then I saw the old guy talking - and was sure he was going to show clear signs lying given the nature of the show. I watched him, and saw few if any signs of deception. If he was lying, he was either very very good at it or really believed what he was saying. I honestly think, given his medical history, he believed what he was saying even if it was slanted. I was surprised when he said that killing people in war didn't bother him (I'd guess most murders would probably say "yes it bothers me to this day, but I had to do it to protect my country") - but it was an honest answer. His answer about what kind of person would do this crime and the "momentarily insane" person response WAS really creepy and very unsettling (far too detailed for the question), but still seemed like more honesty.

And I found it very unsettling that they presented lots of testimony from witnesses who didn't offer that information until AFTER Heaton was convicted. And it's all stuff that can't be backed by evidence. All those current interviews are CRAP - if they didn't come forward before the trial, then it's made up, period. I think they sort-of believe it, but are making up memories to fit what they want to believe as they don't really remember anything.

All in all, I think Heaton's trial probably did suck and maybe he would have deserved a new one at the time. However, I do fully believe he is guilty - and this show was a very terrible attempt at trying to hint otherwise. Definitely biased, and definitely left out alot of the stuff I'd like to know (like how old were these people at the time, where did they live, why would this happen, what does the victims family think, etc).

And now that they've proven a one in 1.3 billion chance that it was someone else's semen (and no, I don't believe that 'one' other criminal that happens to have with the same dna and white truck also lives in that same area), I'm comforted in knowing he won't be getting out of prison any time soon.
ps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2009, 06:33 PM   #111
justins5256
Member
Senior Member
 
justins5256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 08, 2002
Posts: 3,835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Really? I've been watching shows like this for a while now just because I'm trying to practice my body language reading skills after doing research on the topic. I went into this episode assuming he was innocent (why else would they do the show? I've only seen one episode of "the investigators" before - but figured it's not an interesting show if they show how a guilty guy is guilty...).

After watching Stuart Heaton's interview, I no longer had that feeling at all. He had microexpressions and body language of deception, especially at certain questions. I was actually very surprised when he finished, because I was sure the show was going to come out later and prove he was innocent, but I couldn't shake the feeling that he was a total liar.
Hello,

I really like your analysis. I was wondering if you could watch another Unsolved Mysteries segment for me and report back on your findings. I'll send it to you on DVD and will even pay for shipping costs.

Please let me know. Feel free to send me a PM.

Thanks,
Justin

Last edited by justins5256; 03-08-2009 at 06:56 PM.
justins5256 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2009, 09:54 AM   #112
Big3sCompanyFan
Banned
Banned!!
Senior Member
 
Big3sCompanyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 16, 2003
Posts: 2,479
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by george ramos
Stuart Heaton just launched his official website. Forgive me if this link is old. I don't visit this forum that much anymore. Hell, I just found out last November that Unsolved Mysteries is back on the air.

http://stuartheaton.com/wrongman.html
I was thinking WHY would you have a website saying "wrong man" if the DNA shows that you are guilty but if you look at the "Isn't it Odd" section of the site the DNA evidence is not necessarily a slam dunk.

I saw the one hour special on Heaton on Invesigators or some show like that and the detectives were really thinking he could be innocent but at the end they gave the typed upate that the DNA matched Heaton.

If he feels the DNA sample is compromised he needs to get a DNA expert to testify to that but at this stage it's hard to believe it will do any good anyway.
Big3sCompanyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2009, 02:41 AM   #113
samuke
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 26, 2009
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big3sCompanyFan
I was thinking WHY would you have a website saying "wrong man" if the DNA shows that you are guilty but if you look at the "Isn't it Odd" section of the site the DNA evidence is not necessarily a slam dunk.

I saw the one hour special on Heaton on Invesigators or some show like that and the detectives were really thinking he could be innocent but at the end they gave the typed upate that the DNA matched Heaton.

If he feels the DNA sample is compromised he needs to get a DNA expert to testify to that but at this stage it's hard to believe it will do any good anyway.
Well as I said on the last page here, DNA evidence isn't as cut and dry as most people believe. The DNA profile only uses a small bit, and you can actually have matches across several people...
samuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 12:28 PM   #114
igotout
Member
First Time Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 02, 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1
Default More questions

I was not around when this happen but came to know about it as I was married to the boyfriend of Krystal at the time of her death. Here is what I know and what I do not understand.


1. The girl's brother didn't know anyone else that had a white truck but named Stuart, But yet Her boyfriend at the time had a brother who did. and was known to drive it.

2. The boyfriend was there the night before the murder and the morning of. was told this by His (the boyfriend) sister. I guess I should mention that she was 15 or 16 and he was almost 19

3. That baby was the Boyfriends. was told this by the boyfriend.

4. The boyfriend is a carpenter that works for his father and he never has any set hours, he came and went as he pleased. he would go in late, come home early ,and when he came home for lunch which was 99% of the time He would take a longer lunch then he should have taken. I know this Because I was married to him.

5. Was told he went to Ramsey everyday at lunch but that day he never went to Ramsey. Was told this by his sister and by him

6. I know he has a very bad temper and is abusive, jealous and controlling. I know from first hand experience.

7. I know that his family will say and do anything to cover up things he does. again I know because I had it happen to me.

8. Things his sister told me when I asked what Happen, That He would always go see her during his lunch and he would drive from Pana to Ramsey. But on that day he didn't go there. Was told he spent the night there and showered before he left that morning. That they did fine His hair in the shower and he had cuts on his hand but that it happened at work weeks before. That the person who did the autopsy cleaned Krystals body before he was able to get samples. I was told they found his blood on her sheets but that was caused from a scab falling off. I had no reason to doubt anything she said and felt awful for him. I was also told that as soon as they heard they went to the girls house. now I read something about them seeing a white truck around 4:30 and it was leaving and there was 3 people in the truck could that have been the Girls boyfriend and his two brothers.

9. When I asked if he testified I was told no that the prosecutors didn't want him to because of his temper. One day He and I went to some people house and they were taking about why he wouldn't testify and was upset he wouldn't.

10. When someone asked him how he got out of not being served he said he had left town for while and he would out run them. When I asked him about that he said he went to Florida for a few weeks that he just needed to get away from it all. at the time I could understand that and didn't ask any more questions

11. It was not until after we where married he started doing meth and became violent, Things got worse when he found out I was leaving, and even after I left I had to get many restraining orders even years after we had been divorced.

12. They said something about the phone being ripped of the wall, I know when I was with him when I went to the phone when I got scared I would get pushed and he would yank the phone out.

I guess what really got me saying things are not right was when I was telling my present husband about him and his temper. Then after I got to thinking about a white van they had. There was a white van behind His Dads work place they had and in was in tall weeds. I never said anything about it as you see that lot around there. But a year or so later His brother and another man took the van to this mans parents farm and took it apart. What is not right about this is that He (the boyfriend's) brother in law owns a junkyard. and I just never understood that. so the more I thought about I decide to do some searching and came across a lot of stuff but it was the Court TV segment that I said something's just not adding up. If it is true that Krystal was riding around with another man that would be enough to start a very bad argument. Now He is very good at saying lets talk and you can talk for hours but when he is not hearing what he wants or things are not going the way he wants that his temper will start to show.Why would The girls brother not say anything about his sister boyfriend driving his brothers white truck. Why would they not say they found two different seman samples when the boyfriend had been with her the night before her death and the baby was his. and if drugs where involved and I think that drugs where involved why would that never come up and why was that not tested for. I can say I don't think Stuart did it but I can't say her boyfriend or that other man didn't do it. They both had the time and the opportunity. But they boyfriend had more of a reason jealousy.

If anyone can help fill in some blanks I would appreciate it. As we share a child togther. Its one thing for him to be abusive them to be a murderer

Last edited by igotout; 04-02-2009 at 12:56 PM. Reason: spelling
igotout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2009, 10:08 AM   #115
boco357
Not Muhammad Ali
Frequent Poster
 
boco357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 28, 2005
Posts: 106
Default

The Wrong Man episode on Stuart Heaton will air on Tru Tv's The Investigators at 4am on 4/17.
__________________
Are you an enemy of the fat?


www.fatty357.com
boco357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:11 PM   #116
Queen of the Sea
Member
First Time Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 28, 2009
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 1
Default Well...

I think it's REALLY much more convincing Stuart is innocent if you watch the Crime stories version of the story. Ron Harre HAD to have killed Crystal. The unsolved mysteries version tells of the story and what happened and only interviews a few people, but the crime stories version interviews ANOTHER suspect/ Ron Harre which just looking at the guy creeps me out. He @ first says he's never met her and, "When I see her in heaven I still won't know her." Says he's never heard of her, then he says, "well what I have heard about her is...." He just talks and talks and talks about how he is an american and not a killer...which.....why would he say that if the people never asked him anything about that? It is very much more convincing to Ron. He threatened his ex-wife w/ scissors and tore the phone off the wall. In the Nabb murder, the phone was torn off and she was stabbed w/scissors.
Queen of the Sea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2009, 10:49 AM   #117
rosiecotton
Member
First Time Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 11, 2009
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ps
Then I saw the old guy talking - and was sure he was going to show clear signs lying given the nature of the show. I watched him, and saw few if any signs of deception. If he was lying, he was either very very good at it or really believed what he was saying. I honestly think, given his medical history, he believed what he was saying even if it was slanted. I was surprised when he said that killing people in war didn't bother him (I'd guess most murders would probably say "yes it bothers me to this day, but I had to do it to protect my country") - but it was an honest answer. His answer about what kind of person would do this crime and the "momentarily insane" person response WAS really creepy and very unsettling (far too detailed for the question), but still seemed like more honesty.
See, I felt differently when I saw him talk. The fact he kept saying that the murderer had lost his mind at that time, and at that time only, led me to think that he was the guilty party and didn't want - in his own mind - to paint himself as evil, almost making an excuse for his behaviour at that moment in time. Psychologically this is not an uncommon response from criminals. They commit these crimes but in their head try and justify it, don't see it as staining them or making them a bad person.

However, the DNA issue is a very interesting one - that certainly does put the cat among the pigeons. I wasn't at all convinced when I first saw Heaton talk on the WM programme. The mumbo jumbo about falling over, or riding a horse through brambles... all a bit woolly for me. However, there was a lot in the programme which led me to believe he may not be guilty. Having found out about the DNA evidence, though - well, that's pretty damning after all.

There wasn't enough in the programme about Heaton's motive and whether he knew the girl. Did he have a motive? Did he know her? The crime itself certainly wasn't premeditated in my mind, the killer did not come prepared but instead used the weapon found to hand when flying into a rage, which would lead me to believe that perhaps she had just told the father of her child the news - was that Heaton? There just isn't enough evidence out there that covers this.

I feel the trial and the police work in this case was appalling, and he should have another trial. However, I feel that given the DNA results the outcome would in all possibility be the same. It's a curious case though and very poorly handled, which has led to a lot of confusion and uncertainty, not what you want when you are looking for a safe conviction.
rosiecotton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 10:56 PM   #118
samuke
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 26, 2009
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rosiecotton
See, I felt differently when I saw him talk. The fact he kept saying that the murderer had lost his mind at that time, and at that time only, led me to think that he was the guilty party and didn't want - in his own mind - to paint himself as evil, almost making an excuse for his behaviour at that moment in time. Psychologically this is not an uncommon response from criminals. They commit these crimes but in their head try and justify it, don't see it as staining them or making them a bad person.

However, the DNA issue is a very interesting one - that certainly does put the cat among the pigeons. I wasn't at all convinced when I first saw Heaton talk on the WM programme. The mumbo jumbo about falling over, or riding a horse through brambles... all a bit woolly for me. However, there was a lot in the programme which led me to believe he may not be guilty. Having found out about the DNA evidence, though - well, that's pretty damning after all.

There wasn't enough in the programme about Heaton's motive and whether he knew the girl. Did he have a motive? Did he know her? The crime itself certainly wasn't premeditated in my mind, the killer did not come prepared but instead used the weapon found to hand when flying into a rage, which would lead me to believe that perhaps she had just told the father of her child the news - was that Heaton? There just isn't enough evidence out there that covers this.

I feel the trial and the police work in this case was appalling, and he should have another trial. However, I feel that given the DNA results the outcome would in all possibility be the same. It's a curious case though and very poorly handled, which has led to a lot of confusion and uncertainty, not what you want when you are looking for a safe conviction.
Bah why does everyone keep mentioning the DNA evidence? I keep saying it, again and again, that DNA evidence isn't as damning as everyone thinks. So many people think it's so exacting but it's not because all they use is a dna profile and the 'accuracy' is just numbers given by the FBI based on VERY small test sampling (given the population of the world), and the fact is it's not hard to match somebody's dna profile amongst several different people.
samuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 11:46 PM   #119
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 samuke
Bah why does everyone keep mentioning the DNA evidence? I keep saying it, again and again, that DNA evidence isn't as damning as everyone thinks. So many people think it's so exacting but it's not because all they use is a dna profile and the 'accuracy' is just numbers given by the FBI based on VERY small test sampling (given the population of the world), and the fact is it's not hard to match somebody's dna profile amongst several different people.
i agree, plus the sample they used was pretty cruddy. the case against Stuart is really weak: a cruddy DNA sample, cuts on his hand even though he's a carpenter, and that he just so happened to own a white truck. That's the case. yet we have people on here who are 100% positive he's the killer.
__________________
"Dottie had said, in the event I got transferred that she was not interested in going with me. I wasn't expecting her to go with me. And wouldn't have even wanted her to I guess."
wiseguy182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:10 AM   #120
kadrmas15
Retired from Board 03/03/11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 11, 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,892
Default

Well I am not 100 percent positive. I kind of go back and forth on him. I will say without that DNA he should have NEVER been convicted or even charged. I mean the case was very weak, even that cocky, worthless prosecutor, Don Sheafor even admitted that his case stunk, hence why he was looking for a smoking gun and could not find it. The whole odds thing was lackluster and the DNA expert in this case for the prosecution was later found to be biased in that he 'hoped' that the evidence would be enough to convict Heaton yet he himself later discredited the very methods to conclude the 52,000 to 1 odds (which are not impressive) that Heaton was the killer. In fact, in this instance, even if Heaton's DNA did match, it means nothing. The reason is because if he was having an affair with Krystal Nabb than that could be explained away. I dont know, I have gone back and forth as I said, but there is something about this case that does not seem right in that I just have this feeling Heaton is innocent. I mean to me the fact Heaton had cuts on his hands are not convincing. The man was a carpenter, he said that a carpenter actually doing his job will cut his hands, yet some people that like to have the lynch mob mentality took this comment out of context to try to portray Heaton as arrogant when in fact he was just telling the truth and seemed proud of his profession. Again, I think Heaton was just confident in his case and this confidence was misconstrued as arrogance by some people that were desperate to think of him as guilty.
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 03:33 AM.


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.

VigLink badge

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