Fred and Leslie Mueller

The family almost always sides with the accused… I guess that’s their way of coping. I think he’s guilty.

If I may share an objective opinion…….I don’t know whether or not Mr. Mueller is guilty of any crime, but I fail to see any evidence that deviates from his version of events. I am a bit perplexed as to how Mrs. Mueller’s body could have traveled the distance it did along the river, but highly esteemed experts for the defense suggested it to be quite possible, and I won’t think lesser of their opinion than that of the prosecution’s experts. The investigators failed to record an accurate water level at the time of this event, and some experts proclaim that the tests performed by prosecution experts are extremely flawed because they failed to take into account the alleged considerable difference of water height and current comparing the time of this event and when the tests were performed. The water levels were “eyeballed” according to investigators, and no sufficient measurement of the current was performed at the time, but rather considerably later under what is alleged to be significantly varying conditions.
The author of this article clearly believes in Mr. Mueller’s guilt, and I certainly won’t question his/her freedom to feel as they wish. But the points in this article don’t impress me enough. For starters, Mr. Mueller’s description of Mrs. Mueller falling over the cliff does not seem out of the ordinary to me, an objective third-party with nothing to gain or lose in this matter. He made the “swan” comment not on the scene, but rather much later during interrogation when he was asked to be specific. His response simply sounds to me as an attempt to describe the event specifically per his recollection. I could be wrong, but I disagree with the author that his comment is in any way relevant.
The conclusion the author makes about the scratch marks on Mr. Mueller’s face varies tremendously from my own. If the marks were caused by Mrs. Mueller defending herself, the DNA under her fingernails would likely survive the short period of time she was in the water. In fact, DNA has proven to be very difficult to get rid of, often times requiring extreme conditions for extended periods of time. Was there a DNA sample taken? According to my research there was not, or any DNA found did not match Mr. Mueller. The investigators claim that they did not believe Mr. Mueller’s story from the beginning, so DNA should have been searched for during autopsy. I have no difficulty in believing that the scratch marks on Mr. Mueller’s face occurred when he was running to seek help. If my wife were injured, I would run through anything to get her help. Bushes, fire, water, scorpions or anything else that got in my way. I see no reason why Mr. Mueller couldn’t have received those scratches while furiously running the shortest path he could find to get help. Again, I fully admit that I could be wrong, and would gladly be the first to admit it if I were. For what it’s worth, investigators claimed that the scratches were uniform in nature, in 1/8 inch increments if memory serves me. The photographic evidence I have seen didn’t align with that conclusion, nor does it seem to fit what, on average, should be in excess of 1/4 inch increments if they were fingernail scratches. Without DNA, we just don’t know for sure. I never heard the “self-mutilation” claim, so I will choose not to comment on that theory without further research. I appreciate the author noting that in this article.
I also want to point out that only “some” experts disagree that the injuries to Mrs. Mueller are inconsistent with a fall. It should be noted that other experts believe the injuries do align with similar circumstances in which they have direct knowledge. It’s a battle of the experts in this case, and I have no reason to doubt that the injuries do not sufficiently reflect the events as described by Mr. Mueller until someone proves those expert’s theories to be without any merit, which was not done in my opinion. Additionally, the testimony that I am familiar with from the couple’s two daughter’s, son, other close relatives, and even the victim’s parents all suggested that the Mueller’s marriage was one in good standing. Of course the prosecution will try to find those who disagree, but I was not convinced by testimony of a disgruntled former employ or third-party utterances of a distance family friend. What may have gone unnoticed by some is that nearly all of these claims of a wedge in the marriage were absolutely destroyed under cross examination, even to the point of some of them being recanted, such as the case of the former employee.
As with most jurors, I wanted a motive, and I never got one that didn’t seem to be the prosecution grasping at straws. Financial gain didn’t seem to work into their allegations, after all, the family was rather comfortable without any nefarious debts being introduced into trial. There was a claim that the marriage had gone bad and Mr. Mueller did not want to lose his rights to be with his children, but they weren’t exactly little kids anymore. I think one was already a legal adult, the other very close to graduation, and the son not too far off. And I never did see any proof to satisfy me that the marriage had any problems of significance. Some say that the pictures taken that afternoon showed a less-than-happy Mrs. Mueller, but I disagree, and must disagree without a sufficient cache of picture evidence to compare them against. The couple’s children certainly disagree, and they know their mother better than you or I, or even the prosecution and investigators.
In closing, I am sorry to hear of this tragedy, which has captivated me since first seeing the case on 48 Hours and my subsequent internet investigation. I hope that Mrs. Mueller will rest in peace, and I hope that her three children can cope with this horrible loss and lead successful, happy, healthy lives. And as for Mr. Mueller, I don’t know whether or not he committed a crime that chilly afternoon, but I do know that I would not have provided a guilty vote given the evidence I have seen. I would demand proof, and it just doesn’t seem to be there, at least not in my humble opinion. If he is guilty of any wrongdoing, than I hope he can find a way to atone. If not, I wish him the best in coping as well.

It would appear to me that the only case the State had was trying to pick apart Mueller’s statement because there was no circumstantial evidence at all to support a murder charge, certainly not 1st degree which was originally charged and then dismissed when a 2nd deg. murder charge was filed the second time around. In a circumstantial evidence case all of the inferences must support the murder charge only. If a reasonable inference of a piece of circumstantial evidence can be made towards innocence, then that is the path the jury is required to presume under their instructions. Mueller’s son said that both his parents had invited him to go on the walk and he declined. But he could’ve easily have said yes and gone. Presumably then Mueller would’ve called off his plan to murder his wife because his son would’ve been there. The very fact that he asked his son to go on the walk is proof that nothing was premeditated. Regarding his wife’s fall, despite Mueller claiming that she was unconscious when she went into the river, she might not have been or the shock of the cold water could’ve revived her. Her struggling in the water could’ve helped propel her downstream until she was finally overcome with the cold and her injuries. The state’s tests on what an inert dummy does in the at a lower water level seems to me to be irrelevant. The hydraulics of the river would’ve been quite different with the water higher as it was on the day of the accident than lower when the experts did their test. Anyone who has whitewater rafted a river at different heights knows that a river can act radically different with different volumes of water. Lastly, although the state doesn’t have to prove motive, what motive was there? That he was bored with his marriage after 20+ years? That his Catholic wife would’ve fought him in a divorce? They were obviously very wealthy and had plenty of money to split up and there’s nothing surprising at all for such wealthy people to also have large insurance policies.

In the end, all the state had was Mueller’s statement. The case is proof positive as to why you should not talk to the police, period. All Mueller had to do was report that his wife had fallen off the cliff and was somewhere in the river. Had he limited his story to that one sentence, then the cops wouldn’t have gotten an inch further with their case.

I’m a numerologist — using and practicing numerology for more than 50 years. I ran the charts of both Fred and Leslie Mueller and it was VERY evident that there were problems in their lives. Leslie, at the time of her death, had a number that had come into a significant position in March of 2008 and was influencing her life at the time of her death. She had that number as the overtone of her life for the entire year of 2008. It denotes much emotional anguish and usually some kind of test to overcome. Mueller is a control freak, even though Leslie was no lightweight in that department herself. Leslie had a 1 destiny (full addition of the birth date and most powerful number in a numerological chart) and that indicates that she would have been very private and her own counsel and, therefore, no one would have been the wiser of their marital problems (and likely Fred knew that). She would feel strongly that her personal life was nobody’s business but her own. A woman is usually the one to tell a friend or two when there are problems, but unfortunately this wasn’t the case with Leslie. Fred was born on the 17th which is a number of the controller, the one who sets the stage for how things should be in his life and many times for those who live with him. Leslie would have had her own controlling nature and those two numbers can conflict enormously if they aren’t on the same page. It would be a standoff in that case. I could understand her telling Fred that she would make sure his children would never want to be around him again after she exposed his true nature to them, because she would have fought to win this battle of wills in one way or another and more so if things were to really hitting the fan. He likely saw no other way to get rid of her other than through killing her. Also, Fred’s destiny number is a 5 — the salesman’s number, someone who can exaggerate a situation or story to suit what he wants others to hear and believe in a very persuasive manner . . . and he would be good at it, too, since that was his occupation in some respects. It’s also a number of the “flash temper” and believe me, when it comes it comes quickly and the perpetrator doesn’t feel it’s that big of a deal, but it definitely leaves a wake on the one at the receiving end. In this case, the wake was devastating and final.

Dateline is such a long and boring show. I bailed with an hour left. I came here to see the outcome of the trial.

The adjectives he uses are a straight up giveaway. Plus, he’s insanely self-righteous.

Alan tindell, seriously – you don’t think that it is plausible that Fred had anticipated his response to not go for a walk based on their labours of the day… ? Certainly does not speak to ‘lack’ of premeditation…..