Melanie McGuire Interview

/in , /by

Primetime Live interviewed Melanie McGuire last night on TV. See Primetime Webcast: Body of Evidence (click on the videos to the right).

Melanie’s husband was found floating in Chesapeake Bay, dismembered, in three Kenneth Cole suitcases just like the ones Melanie used to own. Melanie says she and her husband had a fight — and he took off and never returned. She didn’t report him missing. Furthermore, Melanie McGuire was a fertility nurse who was having an affair with one of the doctors at the fertility clinic where she worked. Yet, she had just bought a big, beautiful home with her husband. The story is intriguing.

They say there was no apparent motive for murder. I absolutely disagree. There absolutely was a motive in my eyes. Melanie wanted to marry the doctor with whom she had an affair. She wanted the big dream home she had just bought with her husband – and she wanted the two, together, WITHOUT her gambling husband in the mix. If she divorced him, she’d lose the house – she’d be less attractive to her potential doctor-lover with whom she hoped to marry — and so what other option did she have, if she wanted it all? To me, it is clearly visible: Rid herself of the burden in the path of her dreams — her husband.

I see Melanie as a person who is exceptionally manipulative — as someone who will do everything in her power to control her surroundings. I suspect she has learned over the years how to charm gullible people, and how to use them to her advantage so much so I suspect she got a head too big for her shoulders.

To Melanie, I suspect most people were pawns. If she liked you, she’d treat you okay. But if she didn’t – she had no problem lying to you, using you, or getting her way at your expense. Melanie is a woman who is void of emotions – except when the pain is hers. She is cold, callus and calculating. I don’t doubt for an instant that Melanie committed this crime.

I think the facts of this case are overwhelming, first and foremost. Too many things point to Melanie to write off, but setting that aside — when I watch Melanie with an open mind — I see don’t see an innocent person.

When you listen to Melanie when she is asked if she committed this crime, listen to how she responds. She has no conviction in her voice when she answers the question. Why? If you were wrongly accused, innocent and facing prison time — is that how you would respond? Absolutely not. You’d have some pretty strong emotions coming through and that would affect the pitch and tone of your voice. It would affect the inflection, and how you stressed your words. You’d be full of emotion. Notice how Melanie is void of emotions? It’s because she is controlling herself, and playing a role– not being honest with us.

Melanie doesn’t want you to see any anger – because then she thinks you might think she did do it. It’s part of her manipulative game. But that is how a liar’s mind works. An honest person who has just been wrongly convicted of a crime they didn’t commit would be full of emotions — and one of them would likely be anger but Melanie didn’t put that into her equation. An honest person would likely be upset, angry, distraught — because they are innocent and wrongly accused. Melanie doesn’t give us any of this. Her behavior is flat-out inconsistent with her story. It is however very consistent with a liar.

When Melanie says about her gambling husband “He wanted what he wanted and he couldn’t get it fast enough” (time marker 1:35)– look how she grits her teeth. This is an expression of anger – which Melanie is attempting to hold back. Melanie is madder than ever at her husband still. If her husband was brutally murdered by someone else, I have to wonder if she’d still be as angry at him.

What is interesting is that Melanie is honest off and on throughout this interview in an appeal to play on people’s emotions — to give them reason to have doubts — that perhaps she is honest. It’s a sign of an ultra-manipulator. They know this is a key secret to getting away with lies –being honest at points to confuse people.

Melanie admits to the fact she still would have an affair with the doctor knowing now that he went to the police behind her back. She is trying to admit to some of her flaws – in an attempt to gain empathy for the rest of what she says. I shudder to think of all the lies Melanie told in her life to different people and got away with.

Melanie’s tone of voice also really stands out to me in this interview. I bet if we could talk to people who knew her in life prior to this crime — we would be told that this is not Melanie’s normal demeanor. She did not talk like this everyday. This is her “think I am a nice person” voice — a manipulative voice — to try to convince us she is sweet, and kind and decent — that she would never commit a heinous crime like this. I’m not buying it. Melanie is a strong person with strong emotions and strong opinions. She wasn’t soft, gentle and very kind like this often in life. This is her “role playing” voice.

When Melanie says (at time marker 3:15) “ But one thing I am is candid, and blunt” – she is honest again. Notice how she moves her mouth to one side? It’s a sign of complete arrogance. She thinks she is super smart and intelligent.

You see how Melanie disperses her lies in between the truth. She mixes it up nicely. She’s learned over the years, I suspect, that if you admit to some things honestly – your lies go over much easier. Melanie is admitting to who she really is here. This is the “true” Melanie.

When Melanie is asked if is she wrongly accused, or a cold, calculating murder – and McFadden asks which it is — watch Melanie’s smile (at time marker 3:40) Number one, its fake. It falls to fast from her face. Number two, is that how you would respond if you were wrongly convicted? Would you smile??? Absolutely not!

If you were playing a sweet character, however, trying to be nice – might you do this? Melanie has in her mind to be sweet and pleasant through the whole interview – and that is her focus – hence her real emotions are held in check – and we see fake responses – but inappropriate reactions like this smile. The way she finishes answering that question is haunting to me, too. She continues to try to play on people’s emotions – by saying you don’t have to like me, you don’t have to think I’m nice. Yet she can’t contain her real feeling here. You see a glimmer in her eyes, an arrogance — a woman who thinks she’s truly going to get away with it. It’s haunting. She is so manipulative! Thankfully, she underestimated the power of a jury as a collective group!

Part 2: Family Secrets: A Brutal Murder (click on the video on the right).

I find it interesting that Melanie says the following — knowing she is facing life in prison for a crime she supposedly didn’t commit: “This is the definition of terror. Absolute mortal terror.” For a manipulator and a killer– prison would be ‘mortal terror’. She won’t be able to manipulate people anymore.

But what I find ironic is this…. If you were innocent — and someone killed your husband — and for an entire year — the crime was not solved — and you lived in the free world — wouldn’t that be mortal terror? Knowing that a murderer is still out there and that he could come back to get you?! But we never hear Melanie talk about the murderer, if it is not her– do we? Did she live in fear that year? I’d love to know. I suspect not.

When Cynthia McFadden asks Melanie if she killed, shot or dismembered her husband – listen to Melanie’s voice again. It’s weak, without conviction or stance. It’s not a normal response from someone who claims they are innocent.

I am thankful for the conviction that has put Melanie behind bars. I believe she is a dangerous, callus, and manipulative murderer.

Bobby Cutts Clues in Detail

/in , /by

This post is a continuation/expansion on this post which was written before Bobby Cutts, Jr. was arrested.

What are some of the other clues that hinted to me that Cutts wasn’t being honest?

  1. Cutts tone-of-voice when he said the words “No, I did not” when asked by Todd Porter if he had anything to do with the disappearance of Jessie Davis. More than just the tone, it was the lack of stressing enunciation in the presentation of the words, if that makes sense. When someone says something definitively, there is a stressing of the words when one is confident of what they are saying. When Cutts said “No, I did not”, he said it mousy, weak and without conviction.

    For a comparison — right after that when Cutts was asked if he had an attorney –Cutts puts confidence behind his statement when he says the word “yes”. There is more behind that word then when he said “no”. Yet the more serious question was by far the first one where the stakes were exceptionally high. We should have heard a strong enunciative response. We didn’t and that difference clued me in, and raised my eyebrows.

  2. When I listened to Cutts talk, I tried to understand what he was saying– by making logical sense out of the words he was speaking. When he said the following, I tried to figure out what scenario would make this statement make sense.

    “The past five …five days.. have been a like nightmare that that …won’t end, like…every…every second of it , I mean when it seems like it’s turning… and gonna change… it goes back to same, or it gets worse … its different…the way I’ve been…. betrayed and just, I mean I haven’t been myself. I…I can’t sleep. I can’t eat. Anybody that knows me knows me that if I’m normal joking around and laughing…trying to have fun and make everyone else laugh and…it’s juss….just been hell.”

    If I plugged into the equation the what-if-he-did-this-scenario — it all seemed to add up. He was upset that he was being looked at as a suspect — and the stress of being looked at as a suspect was overwhelming him. When the police looked at him closely and then retreated again — it was a living hell for him. He was falling apart wondering if and when the dam was going to break — and the uncertainty of it all was driving him insane. It would make sense why he couldn’t eat or sleep — and why Jessie wasn’t the focus of his thoughts. Cutts was breaking under the pressure and this fit with his behavior and words — and actions — to a tee. Every other scenario I plugged in had inconsistencies.

  3. When Bobby Cutts said he “tried” not to watch the news stories on TV about Jessie Davis — that raised my eyebrows as well. If you are seriously distraught over your missing girlfriend and had nothing to do with her disappearance, you either do or do not watch. You have strong emotions that dictate your actions one-way or another — but you don’t waffle and and “try” not too. I suspects Cutts was afraid to watch it on TV because it would make him go even more crazy — but at times, he couldn’t resist the temptation to hear what was going on — hence he “tried” not too.
  4. When Cuts was asked how many children he had, he stuttered when he asked back “Currently?”. That really got the hair on the back of my neck to stand up. If you have nothing to do with your expected-child’s disappearance, you don’t question “Currently?”. You can interview 100s of people who are innocent and you won’t hear that. The reason I suspect for this is that the pain of accepting the loss of the expectant child is too great for an innocent person — so they stay in the current of what they last knew — until something changes. Innocent people who face a loss like this hang on to every shred of hope they can before conceding it is over.

    Furthermore, Cutts backed it up again when he answered Todd Porter’s question if he had a fourth child on the way with Jessie. Cutts said “Possibly, yes”. Again, for an innocent person — the words “possibly” would NEVER enter into their mind. They would be hanging on to every shred of hope they could muster. But when someone has something to do with harming someone, they often “distance” themselves from things.

  5. Bobby acted completely distraught far beyond what everyone else was. That was a red flag in itself. While there are scenarios where people will react differently — and emotionally out-of-the-norm and could still be totally uninvolved, we would expect to see behavioral patterns that support the emotions. With Cutts, I did not.

To come to these conclusions, it’s important I share with you that I am constantly doing a balancing act between what is said, how a person is behaving, feeling and acting. Alone a piece of information may be potentially logical — but in a puzzle, a square piece will never fit in a round hole.

Jessie Davis/Bobby Cutts, Jr.

/in , /by

The Canton Repository did an audio interview with Bobby Cutts, Jr. on June 19th. I have been curiously looking for video footage of Bobby Cutts, Jr. talking about the disappearance of his girlfriend, but I guess I am not going to get it. I would have loved to see his facial expressions when he talked to the Canton Rep, Todd Porter, the other day. Instead, I will have to settle for audio only.

I have listened to his audio-taped interview — and while I CANNOT draw the same conclusions I do when I watch someone, I can see if things are making sense, and are logical — and at this point, I must say my eyebrows are raised.

Todd Porter interviewed Cutts for a reasonable amount of time — at least 10 minutes from what I can tell — and what amazed me the most during that entire time is all he did was talk about himself. He didn’t once talk about Jessie or the baby. Cutts gives me a real strong feeling that he thinks he is the “victim” here by his choice of words. He even goes so far as to say the word “betrayed”. That really perplexes me.

Who does he feel is betraying him? Why is this all about him?

If I interviewed him, I’d have to find this out. Many spouses, boyfriends, and lovers are closely examined in a missing persons case — but when they are innocent — they don’t act like victims. They usually go public and state their innocence, and try to keep focus on finding their loved ones. They want to do all they can to help get their loved one back. We aren’t seeing this behavior in any vein from Cutts. Why?

Does he feel the police station where he worked is betraying him? Could that be why he feels betrayed?

TODD PORTER: Uh, how have uh, your co-workers and colleagues and, and supervisors at the Canton Police Department been throughout this process?

CUTTS: They’ve been very supportive. They told me they had my back in anything I need.

So, why is Cutts playing the victim? Why would he feel like a victim? He even said they weren’t calling him a suspect in the media.

TODD PORTER: Have the, have any authorities told you that you’ve been cleared in this, in this investigation?

BOBBY: No they, they, they have not told me that I have been cleared but as like I said, on the media, I mean they said to the media that I, me nor my wife are suspects but uh, I don’t feel that we’ve actually been treated as that was 100 percent true.

He isn’t giving us any strong indication that he is upset about this, or is he holding back his true feelings? If people are suggesting you might be a suspect, and you are innocent — what would you do? Would you say what Cutts is saying, or would you defend your innocence? Would you be clear and precise, or beat-around-the-bush?

The next statement below is the first statement within the interview that I heard, and it immediately caught my attention. You can tell he is clearly thinking as he is talking. He is not letting the words flow naturally.

TODD PORTER:
Bobby, what have the last five days been like for you?

(Do I hear laughter here? — or is this some object moving in the background? I can’t tell. If it is laughter, that is a big concern!)

CUTTS:
“The past five …five days.. have been a like nightmare that that …won’t end, like…every…every second of it , I mean when it seems like it’s turning… and gonna change… it goes back to same, or it gets worse … its different…the way I’ve been…. betrayed and just, I mean I haven’t been myself. I…I can’t sleep. I can’t eat. Anybody that knows me knows me that if I’m normal joking around and laughing…trying to have fun and make everyone else laugh and…it’s juss….just been hell.”

This statement perplexes me as well. It isn’t very coherent, it rambles on and on — and then I am perplexed by what it all means. When Cutts says “…every second of it , I mean when it seems like it’s turning… and gonna change… it goes back to same, or it gets worse … its different…“. What is Cutts referring to?

What’s been “turning”? What gives him the impression “it” (whatever it is) is going to change? He continues “…and it goes back to being the same, or it gets worse.”

What has gotten worse? From the media, we haven’t received any clues that there is any new evidence with regards to the police finding Davis. There have been no false hopes, no false leads, etc. This statement is perplexing. What has gone back to the same? What is he talking about here?

I have to wonder is Cutts referring to being looked at as a suspect. Is that his nightmare? Or is his nightmare that his girlfriend disappeared?

If your girlfriend disappeared with your unborn child — which of the two would be a priority for you — nurturing your feeling-like-a-victim, or fighting for her safe return? This is a man who says he can’t eat or sleep, but ironically he does have it within him to do an interview to talk about himself. He can do that — but he can’t muster anything for Jessie? Who is Cutts concerned about?

I found the next two statements odd too. Why does Bobby have to be prompted to talk about the unborn child he is expecting? Isn’t this all about Davis and her unborn child in the first place?

TODD PORTER: Um, just for the record and to clear this up, how many children do you have? Um…

CUTTS: Cur- currently I have three children.

TODD PORTER: And expecting a fourth with Jessie, correct?

CUTTS: Possibly, yes.

I found the words “currently” and “possibly” odd as well.

Last, wasn’t Bobby Cutts supposed to pick up or drop off his son on Thursday? Why then was the child still home alone on Friday? I find it odd if he was close to his girlfriend that he wasn’t the one to figure out she was missing.

These are just a handful of things that I see that are odd. At this point, I think all eyes should remain on Cutts as a suspect. My eyebrows are most certainly raised by his behavior. If any video comes out — please let me know.
____________

To see more that I have written on Davis/Cutts, click on the Label below.

Lisa Stebic Missing

/in , /by

Lisa Stebic went missing from her Plainfield, Illinois home back on April 30th. I saw the story profiled on Greta Van Susteren last night.

Lisa “…was last seen at her home (in Plainfield, Illinois) at around 6 pm. Her car is still in her garage and she has her cell phone and wallet with her. According to police, her cell phone has not been used since April 30th and neither has her credit card. Lisa would never leave her children.” (Source FindLisaStebic.com).

I attempted to find video of Lisa’s husband talking this morning and I am unable to. I found one small clip of him talking behind a glass door, but it didn’t yield much information outside of the fact he was very nervous. It was hard to see him as he was questioned at an odd angle.

So far, it appears police found blood on a tarp which Craig said came from deer hunting. However, DNA revealed the blood was from Lisa.

At this time, Craig has not officially been charged with anything, nor is he being called a suspect by police.

If you see any video of Craig Stebic talking about his wife’s disappearance, please let me know.

Confess to a murder you didn’t commit?

/in , , /by

Brief Case Summary Here at Wikipedia

CBS News show 48 Hours profiled a case on Saturday night about a Halloween night murder in Columbia, Missouri, a few years back. A newspaper editor, Kent Heitholt, was found bludgeoned to death beside his car in the parking lot at 2:00 in the morning — and police couldn’t solve the case.

For two years.

Then, a local young man started talking to his friends and telling them he was dreaming about the murders. The young man finally went to the police and told them.

You have to watch the video of the young man, Chuck Erickson, talking to police. Go to this page, and then on the right-hand side of the screen, you will see Chuck on a video screen . Watch the video footage. Chuck is being lead by police.

For some strange reason, this young man either convinced himself he was the murderer from his dreams, or was lead by police and then convinced by their actions he was the murderer. Perhaps this young man is mentally ill and twisted and wanted to see how far he could take things by trying to get his friend convicted and sentence to prison. I have no idea what the motivating factor is to admit to a crime he didn’t commit, but I can tell you I don’t believe Chuck killed anyone.

I have little doubt that Chuck Erickson has a troubled past. More than that, I think Chuck Erickson is likely to be pathological. He is a classic “neutral person” who doesn’t express one OUNCE of emotion. He is like a drone. Void and empty. With that, I can tell you what wouldn’t motivate a young man like Chuck to go to the police and confess: a guilty conscience. Chuck didn’t and still doesn’t have any emotions — let alone a guilty conscious. When Chuck talks and points out Ryan Ferguson in court, he is saying what he thinks he should say without any conviction in his face or voice.

I do not believe that Chuck Erickson murdered anyone. Nor do I believe his friend, Ryan Ferguson is guilty, either. (FYI: Ryan was sentence to 40 years in prison. An innocent man is sitting in jail).

When I see Ryan Ferguson talk, I truly believe what he has to say. In the first thirty second clip of Ryan on the show, when he said he was glad his parents believed him, Ryan flashed a an expression which showed genuine relief — which was congruent to what he was saying. It was at this point, I knew Ryan was innocent. And the more Ryan talked, the more he convinced me. His emotions matched his words and his actions. It was all congruent.

Here are other reasons why I don’t believe either committed the murders:

  1. The crime scene was bloody. Blood spatter was everywhere — yet no one saw these unprofessional high-school-aged killers with bloody clothes, or found bloody clothes disposed of.
  2. Nor did the police ever find the murder weapon.
  3. Don’t tell me youth like these can commit the perfect murder without a conscious plan to commit murder. I don’t buy it. I personally suspect this was a politically motivated murder executed by a hitman. It was too perfect.
  4. How come the police were never able to link the two boys to the crime with DNA? The police had DNA — a hair in the victim’s hand.
  5. While there was a janitor in the building who thought he saw two boys in the parking lot, he wasn’t able to give any description of them for years! He only remembered when the police told him what he was supposed to remember. Furthermore, this janitor has a shaky past (as he was in prison).
  6. Chuck Erickson comes across as a man who feels no emotion, has no emotion or feelings for any other person. He is emotionally void. When he spoke in court, I did not get one hint of support that he was telling the truth. Everything he said however points to a lie.
  7. The evidence against Chuck that he is a liar is mounting. Chuck’s story about the murder involves the two boys who were at the time of murder in high school going back to a bar after the crime. If this is accurate, the boys would have returned to the bar after 2:00 a.m. The bar closed at 1:30 a.m. Chuck’s story is a lie.
  8. Ryan Ferguson emotions, and facial expressions were all consistent with what he was saying. I have no doubt this boy is honest in the face of all of these facts.