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.