Russ Faria Case Discussion

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Sun Jun 07, 2015 12:50 pm

There seems to be some confusion over what they can do about the bail over on Russ's Facebook campaign page. Looks like they started a gofundme but the links don't work now. I'll see if I can find out what's happening with that, I'd be happy to donate.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:21 pm

lonepinealex wrote:There seems to be some confusion over what they can do about the bail over on Russ's Facebook campaign page. Looks like they started a gofundme but the links don't work now. I'll see if I can find out what's happening with that, I'd be happy to donate.


I would try to give something too but not be significant
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:28 pm

Well indeed, I could only give a drop in the ocean of what they need, but if enough people put a drop in it'll help them. Anyway, I can't find anything about the gofundme, seems to have disappeared with no explanation.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:36 pm

Just to be clear, they would need about 50,000 for a bail bondsman. Not sure what his sister has already sacrificed with regards to this case.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Sun Jun 07, 2015 4:18 pm

I hope that - in the new trial - the defense brings out the implausibility of the prosecution murder scenario - all of the various ways Russ could have been observed at the wrong place at the wrong time, as well as the danger of any one of the four alibi witnesses turning state's evidence and sending Russ and the other 3 to prison for the rest of their lives. Why set up an alibi with 4 people any one of whom can turn you in?
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:19 am

Desert Fox wrote:Just to be clear, they would need about 50,000 for a bail bondsman. Not sure what his sister has already sacrificed with regards to this case.


On the facebook page, they had a discussion which seemed to be saying that the 50k was beyond their means anyway, because of all the legal fees they've had to pony up. But also, they want to avoid using a bondsman if they can, because they won't get that money back.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:00 am

Russ Faria walks out of jail, says he’s ready for new trial

http://fox2now.com/2015/06/16/russ-faria-walks-out-of-jail-says-hes-ready-for-new-trial/
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby MichaelB » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:41 am

Bruce Fischer wrote:Russ Faria walks out of jail, says he’s ready for new trial

http://fox2now.com/2015/06/16/russ-faria-walks-out-of-jail-says-hes-ready-for-new-trial/


This is great news. He looks well. Nice video in that article of him reuniting with his family.

More photos here: https://www.facebook.com/cassondra.drake/posts/888082777897595?pnref=story

Image
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6172
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:24 am

Image


Great News. :clap:

Here is a pic of Russ being greeted on the 'outside' :winks: as a free man again.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Thu Jun 18, 2015 4:07 pm

Was he free on bond before the first trial or is this the first time he has seen free air since Betsy was murdered?
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby jane » Thu Jun 18, 2015 4:43 pm

Bruce Fischer wrote:Russ Faria walks out of jail, says he’s ready for new trial

http://fox2now.com/2015/06/16/russ-faria-walks-out-of-jail-says-hes-ready-for-new-trial/


I am very glad to hear this. I wish that more of these wrongful conviction cases could be addressed at the local level. Too many of them are "kicked upstairs" and require years and years to resolve.
jane
 
Posts: 2720
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:32 am

brilliant, brilliant news.

Desert Fox - the news report seems to imply he's been in jail since the arrest, so yeah this is the first time he's been out.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:02 pm

lonepinealex wrote:brilliant, brilliant news.

Desert Fox - the news report seems to imply he's been in jail since the arrest, so yeah this is the first time he's been out.


I thought I remembered reading that as well
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby MichaelB » Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:01 pm

Russ Faria talks about being out of jail and preparing for his new trial

http://fox2now.com/2015/06/24/russ-faria-talks-about-being-out-of-jail-and-preparing-for-his-new-trial/
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6172
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby MichaelB » Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:04 pm

The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6172
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby MichaelB » Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:39 pm

"I don't really belong here"
Russ Faria on his time behind bars.

http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/video/i-dont-really-belong-here-471133251992
The stupid things Ergon says - THE BEST OF NASEER AHMAD: "Curatolo's testimony is one of the bedrock foundations of my beliefs in this case."
User avatar
MichaelB
 
Posts: 6172
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Perryville Prison

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:41 am

MichaelB wrote:"I don't really belong here"
Russ Faria on his time behind bars.

http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/video/i-dont-really-belong-here-471133251992


Brought a little tear to my eye.

What's with that presenter? The timbre of his voice almost comes off like a parody of a US TV presenter!
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Merk » Fri Aug 07, 2015 10:47 am

So do the cops have eyes on Pam Hupp (and family)? Or does she have free reign to kill people and collect their insurance payout? Hopefully there's been a private investigator or someone tailing her this whole time? I don't see any way in the world they can proceed with a second trial.
Merk
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Wed Oct 07, 2015 3:43 pm

Decided by a judge vs a jury? Good or bad in this case?

http://fox2now.com/2015/10/01/fox-files ... rder-case/
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:07 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Decided by a judge vs a jury? Good or bad in this case?

http://fox2now.com/2015/10/01/fox-files ... rder-case/



Always a tough call. When I was doing criminal law, we had a HUGE range in judges - with some totally biased for prosecutors, others open-minded and still others leaning toward the defense. I was litigating politically charged selective service cases so my experience may be atypical but, in many cases, the most important decision in the process was the clerk's decision on which judge would be assigned to the case. So the choice really depends upon the specific judge. I do think that judges may have a better appreciation of the BARD standard and be more able to acquit even though they think that there is some possibility of guilt. Jurors may have a lot of trouble facing the victim's family unless they are absolutely sure of innocence. On the other hand, in this case I would have no trouble whatsoever being absolutely sure of innocence.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:26 pm

So do you think that a good defense attorney would not even suggest this unless he knew the judge involved in this case? It is a new judge, I believe?
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:33 pm

Desert Fox wrote:So do you think that a good defense attorney would not even suggest this unless he knew the judge involved in this case? It is a new judge, I believe?



I can't imagine making this decision without - 1. knowing who was going to be the judge, and 2. having a pretty solid understanding of the judge and his or her history in other cases. I guess I would qualify it by saying that - there may be some cases and venues in which the jury pool would be so horrible that I might avoid a jury trial without knowing who the judge would be but that would be very, very unusual.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:58 pm

Even with this jury, I saw at least one pretty much admit that he thought "maybe" he was guilty and if you convict based on that, you are a pretty terrible juror. I also thought that a judge couple also chose dismiss a case before it is even up for a jury? If so, I would ask for a judge to rule on merits before even involving a trial.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:58 am

"Days later, deputies sprayed Luminol and said it showed blood, but CSI Agent Buettner said they did that after the scene was contaminated. It was days later when Faria’s family was allowed back inside to clean the home. Luminol can also reveal false positives when it reacts with cleaning solutions." http://fox2now.com/2015/11/02/russ-fari ... -theories/

Nice to see someone acknowledge that luminol can give false positives. But it also sounds as if the prosecution tried to hide some luminol photographs from the defense, yet they want to claim that the camera malfunctioned. "Merkel said, 'There was a malfunction with the aperture light controlled by the camera.' He added, 'We were unable to capture luminescence in the photos. We couldn’t document what we saw with the naked eye.' http://fox2now.com/2015/11/03/day-2-pro ... -evidence/

Why am I not surprised?
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:42 am

Some crazy stuff coming out in this re-trial: http://fox2now.com/2015/11/05/faria-mur ... an-affair/

Sounds like a Sherlock Holmes case! If that note on the computer is proved to be a plant, surely Pam Hupp is completely screwed?
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Sarah » Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:34 pm

BREAKING NEWS!

RUSS FARIA FOUND NOT GUILTY!


"TROY, MO (KTVI) - On Friday, the judge in the retrial of Russ Faria found him not guilty in his wife's 2011 stabbing death . Faria had previously been convicted of murder in a 2013 jury trial. Both the prosecution and the defense gave their closing arguments Friday morning."

http://fox2now.com/2015/11/06/judge-russell-faria-found-not-guilty-of-murder-in-retrial/
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Sarah » Fri Nov 06, 2015 6:09 pm

User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:07 pm

Hooray!
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:37 pm

lonepinealex wrote:Some crazy stuff coming out in this re-trial: http://fox2now.com/2015/11/05/faria-mur ... an-affair/

Sounds like a Sherlock Holmes case! If that note on the computer is proved to be a plant, surely Pam Hupp is completely screwed?


Bet you that there will never be any prosecution of her. . . .
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby jane » Tue Nov 10, 2015 9:58 am

Sarah wrote:Judge Acquits Russ Faria in Retrial for Wife's Murder

http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/judge-acquits-russ-faria-retrial-wifes-murder-n458916


Great news!!
jane
 
Posts: 2720
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Tue Nov 10, 2015 3:57 pm

I found something interesting which seems to be common with way too many cases
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/09/russ-fari ... es-killer/

Faria`s friend Marshall Bach said investigators even pressured him to tell a story that wasn`t true. On the stand at the re-trial Bach said he felt threatened and that police offered him immunity. He said he responded 'immunity from what?' He and three other friends never backed down from saying they were with Russ Faria during the time of the murder.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Nov 11, 2015 12:31 pm

Sarah wrote:Judge Acquits Russ Faria in Retrial for Wife's Murder

http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/judge-acquits-russ-faria-retrial-wifes-murder-n458916



Great News!!!! Another one in the win column. We should be working on identifying new cases now that this is resolved.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Wed Nov 11, 2015 7:32 pm

I can think of a few...
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Nov 11, 2015 8:23 pm

Chris_Halkides wrote:I can think of a few...



I am looking at: 1. Michael Goodwin (I am convinced we should jump in but I may have to drive very very carefully next time I am in LA); 2. Chico Forti (I suspect this is a good one for us, but I am still trying to get my hands on all the primary material), and 3. Graswald (not really a wrongful conviction but it has all the preliminary indications of maturing into one.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Wed Nov 11, 2015 8:32 pm

Mark Lundy and Isaiah Fowler are on my list. There is also a case in Georgia that was discussed at ISF about six months ago, but I am having trouble remembering the name of the person.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Fri Nov 13, 2015 11:46 pm

As a matter of housekeeping, I guess that the Faria case should now be moved to "Successful Cases".
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Numbers » Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:56 pm

erasmus44 wrote:As a matter of housekeeping, I guess that the Faria case should now be moved to "Successful Cases".


Here is an excerpt from the National Registry of Exonerations report on Russ Faria's acquittal on retrial:

At Faria’s first trial, a detective testified that the home appeared to have been cleaned of blood, but said that there were no photographs of the crime scene because the police camera had malfunctioned.

Before the retrial, however, the defense discovered more than 100 photographs of the crime scene that had been taken by police but had not been disclosed to the defense. Those photographs showed no evidence that the home had been cleaned of blood.

Hupp, who had denied any involvement in the murder in out-of-court statements, was not called as a witness by the prosecution. The defense, however, elicited testimony from detectives that Hupp had made numerous contradictory statements about her activity on the day of the murder. In addition, the detectives testified, three years after the murder Hupp had disclosed for the first time that she had had a sexual relationship with the victim and that Russell Faria learned of it before the murder and was angry about it.

On November 6, 2015, Judge Ohmer acquitted Faria on both charges.



http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoner ... aseid=4792

Interesting that the police and prosecution did not provide the crime scene photos for the first trial.
Expert witness testimony must be the product of reliable principles and methods. {Paraphrase of Fed. Rules of Evidence 702c}
Numbers
 
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 8:29 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:32 am

Numbers,

The photographs are intriguing. It seems as if the prosecution initially claimed that they did not exist. Now their cover story seems to be that the camera was not working properly. Frankly, their story is difficult to believe.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:43 am

From listening to the latest episode of Undisclosed, it sounds like prosecutors will often try to hide evidence from the defense even if they are suppose to get it all based on Brady.
Now, the defense in the first trial was not allowed to present Pam Hupp as an alternative suspect but I wonder how else they hamstrung the defense.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:46 pm

Desert Fox wrote:I found something interesting which seems to be common with way too many cases
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/09/russ-fari ... es-killer/

Faria`s friend Marshall Bach said investigators even pressured him to tell a story that wasn`t true. On the stand at the re-trial Bach said he felt threatened and that police offered him immunity. He said he responded 'immunity from what?' He and three other friends never backed down from saying they were with Russ Faria during the time of the murder.

Immunity from a charge of perjury and accessory to murder - obviously.

I don't see a problem with police offering immunity if they believe an alibi is false. And since Faria had a motive so large you could drive a Mack truck through it, and the alternative suspect didn't, you could see why the police might have reached that conclusion.

Perhaps you should ask Amanda Knox what she thinks about the idea that someone who had been visiting a friend 15 minutes before she is murdered becoming the prime suspect after everyone else manages to grab an alibi. I suspect she might not think too highly of it as a concept.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:20 pm

His Grey Eminence wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I found something interesting which seems to be common with way too many cases
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/09/russ-fari ... es-killer/

Faria`s friend Marshall Bach said investigators even pressured him to tell a story that wasn`t true. On the stand at the re-trial Bach said he felt threatened and that police offered him immunity. He said he responded 'immunity from what?' He and three other friends never backed down from saying they were with Russ Faria during the time of the murder.

Immunity from a charge of perjury and accessory to murder - obviously.

I don't see a problem with police offering immunity if they believe an alibi is false. And since Faria had a motive so large you could drive a Mack truck through it, and the alternative suspect didn't, you could see why the police might have reached that conclusion.

Perhaps you should ask Amanda Knox what she thinks about the idea that someone who had been visiting a friend 15 minutes before she is murdered becoming the prime suspect after everyone else manages to grab an alibi. I suspect she might not think too highly of it as a concept.


Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife? Have you studied this case?

Your comparison to the Knox case makes little sense. You seem to want to include Knox in every post you make here. Pam Hupp was not only the last person to see Betsy Faria alive, she was also the newly signed beneficiary of the victim's life insurance policy.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:43 pm

Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife?

Because his terminally ill wife was signing away life insurance policies.
Have you studied this case?

Not especially
Your comparison to the Knox case makes little sense.

Making little sense is my trademark.
You seem to want to include Knox in every post you make here.

I have made two posts, I think, on Italian cases and I think there are very interesting parallels with the Knox case (although I don't think I drew a parallel in the Bossetti post???). I have made a post on Lockerbie sans Knox. I will see if I can edit in a Knox reference.
Pam Hupp was not only the last person to see Betsy Faria alive

The murderer was the last person to see Betsy Faria alive.
she was also the newly signed beneficiary of the victim's life insurance policy.

Which tends to support her claim that Betsy Faria was afraid of her husband.

I don't know who killed Betsy Faria and if the courts have said that it can not be proved that Russ Faria did it, I accept that. But online vigilantes should be careful about pointing fingers at other people. What I would say there is nothing wrong with police offering immunity if they think someone is offering a false alibi, that is their job. I would also say I understand why the police concentrated on trying to break Russ Faria's alibi and in their situation I would have done the same on the information to hand. Possibly that was a mistake, but I can see why the police would conclude that was the right approach.

A recipe for wrongful conviction is leaping to the assumption that someone without an alibi is guilty or that someone who claims an alibi is innocent.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby B_Real » Tue Dec 15, 2015 5:13 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife?

Because his terminally ill wife was signing away life insurance policies.


What would be the point of killing her after the policy had been signed away?
User avatar
B_Real
 
Posts: 3756
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:12 am

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 8:51 am

We should be careful about accusing others of committing this crime. Faria's defense rests on his solid alibi - he couldn't have done it. You don't have to prove that someone else did it or that he didn't have a motive to know that he must be innocent. This is an alibi case and now it is the job of the authorities to try to figure out who actually did it.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bill Williams » Tue Dec 15, 2015 9:16 am

erasmus44 wrote:We should be careful about accusing others of committing this crime. Faria's defense rests on his solid alibi - he couldn't have done it. You don't have to prove that someone else did it or that he didn't have an alibi to know that he must be innocent. This is an alibi case and now it is the job of the authorities to try to figure out who actually did it.

It is a huge distraction to this thread to speculate about stuff.
    “The only way I can pay back for what fate and society have handed me is to try, in minor totally useless ways, to make an angry sound against injustice.”
    Martha Gellhorn
Bill Williams
 
Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 5:49 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:20 am

Bill Williams wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:We should be careful about accusing others of committing this crime. Faria's defense rests on his solid alibi - he couldn't have done it. You don't have to prove that someone else did it or that he didn't have an alibi to know that he must be innocent. This is an alibi case and now it is the job of the authorities to try to figure out who actually did it.

It is a huge distraction to this thread to speculate about stuff.


I edited my post to substitute "a motive" for "an alibi" - Faria has a rock solid alibi so we don't even have to get into the motive issue.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:25 pm

Russ Faria's defense on appeal was strongly based on suggesting Hupp was the killer. I am not speculating when I discuss that fact.

There is no way Russ committed the crime. He has an air tight alibi. The judge who threw out his conviction and ordered a new trial was strongly critical of the court that convicted him. It was a scathing dismissal of their decision.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:32 pm

Do I think Pam Hupp killed Betsy Faria based on the arguments put forth by the defense that she is the likely killer? I think it's highly probable. Would I support a conviction based on current evidence? No. Time will tell if new evidence ever comes to light. One thing is crystal clear. Russ Faria is an innocent man.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:35 pm

Bruce Fischer wrote:Do I think Pam Hupp killed Betsy Faria based on the arguments put forth by the defense that she is the likely killer? I think it's highly probable. Would I support a conviction based on current evidence? No. Time will tell if new evidence ever comes to light. One thing is crystal clear. Russ Faria is an innocent man.



I completely agree.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Tue Dec 15, 2015 4:22 pm

B_Real wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:
Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife?

Because his terminally ill wife was signing away life insurance policies.


What would be the point of killing her after the policy had been signed away?

She had two policies IIRC, a $100 000 and $150 000 - only one was signed away.
So a possible motive would be
1. Rage at losing money he thought he was entitled to and would be his in a few months.
2 Fear of losing another $100 000
3. The belief that if the murder was pinned on Hupp she certainly wouldn't get the $150000 and - depending on the fine print - it might revert to next of kin possibly to him as trustee for the children.

Given such a strong motive the fear the police would have was that focusing on Hupp would result in jailing a woman whose only crime was being supportive to a friend who was dying of cancer. That is why they made the decision to try and break Faria's alibi - and I would have done the same in their situation.

Obviously, that might be mistaken, but there is no real evidence or motive against Hupp besides she had the opportunity.

I mean if Rudy Guede had remembered to flush the toilet and had four people swearing they were with him all night, that wouldn't have changed the situation of whether he killed Meredith Kercher or not. It just would have meant he was a bit cleverer, a bit more well-connected and might have been able to beat the charge. You don't go and then throw aspersions on an innocent person who had been blithely unaware she needed to account for every second of her evening.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:24 pm

His Grey Eminence wrote:
B_Real wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:
Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife?

Because his terminally ill wife was signing away life insurance policies.


What would be the point of killing her after the policy had been signed away?

She had two policies IIRC, a $100 000 and $150 000 - only one was signed away.
So a possible motive would be
1. Rage at losing money he thought he was entitled to and would be his in a few months.
2 Fear of losing another $100 000
3. The belief that if the murder was pinned on Hupp she certainly wouldn't get the $150000 and - depending on the fine print - it might revert to next of kin possibly to him as trustee for the children.

Given such a strong motive the fear the police would have was that focusing on Hupp would result in jailing a woman whose only crime was being supportive to a friend who was dying of cancer. That is why they made the decision to try and break Faria's alibi - and I would have done the same in their situation.

Obviously, that might be mistaken, but there is no real evidence or motive against Hupp besides she had the opportunity.

I mean if Rudy Guede had remembered to flush the toilet and had four people swearing they were with him all night, that wouldn't have changed the situation of whether he killed Meredith Kercher or not. It just would have meant he was a bit cleverer, a bit more well-connected and might have been able to beat the charge. You don't go and then throw aspersions on an innocent person who had been blithely unaware she needed to account for every second of her evening.



Once again, your comparison to the Knox case makes no sense. If Guede could prove that he had been with 4 people at the time of Kercher's murder, the murder never would have occurred. Faria's alibi is rock solid. He's innocent and free.

Of course there was motive for Hupp. She collected on the life insurance and is now being sued by Betsy Faria's kids because they claim she stole the money from them.

Think what you want about Hupp. That takes nothing away from Faria's innocence.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:32 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
B_Real wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:
Why do you think Faria had a motive to kill his wife?

Because his terminally ill wife was signing away life insurance policies.


What would be the point of killing her after the policy had been signed away?

She had two policies IIRC, a $100 000 and $150 000 - only one was signed away.
So a possible motive would be
1. Rage at losing money he thought he was entitled to and would be his in a few months.
2 Fear of losing another $100 000
3. The belief that if the murder was pinned on Hupp she certainly wouldn't get the $150000 and - depending on the fine print - it might revert to next of kin possibly to him as trustee for the children.

Given such a strong motive the fear the police would have was that focusing on Hupp would result in jailing a woman whose only crime was being supportive to a friend who was dying of cancer. That is why they made the decision to try and break Faria's alibi - and I would have done the same in their situation.

Obviously, that might be mistaken, but there is no real evidence or motive against Hupp besides she had the opportunity.

I mean if Rudy Guede had remembered to flush the toilet and had four people swearing they were with him all night, that wouldn't have changed the situation of whether he killed Meredith Kercher or not. It just would have meant he was a bit cleverer, a bit more well-connected and might have been able to beat the charge. You don't go and then throw aspersions on an innocent person who had been blithely unaware she needed to account for every second of her evening.


His Grey; you say in your post that you would have done the same thing as the police did in the polices situation!

The police were not in any situation. It is an unfortunate aspect of their profession to investigate Murders and what you seem to be missing here is that had Russ Faria had no solid alibi he would be serving life in prison and you have just admitted you would have sent him there.

As to situations then just imagine how many innocent 'Russ Faria situation' men are in prison because the police did not support the accused alibi during the investigation phase, rather they were trying to break it ensuring the accused had a shaky alibi in court.

If Russ had no alibi then he would be serving life in prison that is the point your not taking home. In these type cases, the police all too often railroad spouses and look for an easy and quick suspect to conclude the case satisfactorily giving victims the closure they need and keeping their bosses happy.

At best Hupp is a very disturbing and dishonest person and or at worst the police knowingly used her to falsely convict Russ Faria. Let's assume that Russ hired a hit man based on your theory and tried to Frame Hupp. Would the Police also not be fearful that they are sending a innocent grieving spouse to prison whose only crime was to love his wife.

I mean you can spin it anyway you want, but the issue here is that without the alibi an innocent man would have gone to prison.

1.The police are incompetent.

2.The police railroad suspects.

3.Ignore more appropriate lines of inquiry.

4.Routinely focus on the spouse.

5.The Police are over worked and under resourced and see making examples out of people regardless of guilt or innocence as a more cost effective approach to law enforcement that yields better results regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent because really it's about the greater good. So yes the police would be fearful to prosecute Hupp because they believe people understand lessons that are black and white, where the spouse gets life for murder of wife, not complicated life insurance conspiracies.

However it is wrong to sugar coat such a system with a Jury who is ignorant of the true facts and is lied to in court. Why not just let the police decide who is guilty and who to send to jail but with much shorter sentences . It is how it works in Japan but they serve very little time in prison. If you want such a system then you have to have lighter sentences and get rid of the jury system. It is the illusion of justice and guilt that is so morally offensive in such a strategy that you espouse in your previous post. Every action has a counter action, it is what made the anglo norman - William the conqueror so effective.



One misspoken word during interview or even a 911 call from such a suspect particularly one without much of an alibi and they will end up serving life and yet the police can make as many mistakes as they like, change testimonies, and be routinely incompetent and you will defend them.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:20 pm

I agree with McGirr. Without the alibi, Russ is toast.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Thu Dec 17, 2015 12:48 am

erasmus44 wrote:I agree with McGirr. Without the alibi, Russ is toast.


It warms my heart to see how concerned you are that no one should be convicted simply on the basis of the absence of an alibi - unless her name happens to be Pamela Hupp, in which case it is pip and dandy.

It seems to me that there are two competing presumptions of innocence. There is Russ Faria, who has faced trial been convicted and had that conviction overturned as not being beyond reasonable doubt. Then there is Pamela Hupp for which the only evidence against her is that she was visiting her terminally ill friend very close to the TOD. We also need to respect her presumption of innocence and balance that with Russ Faria's.

The police, who interviewed both, were convinced that Russ Faria was gaming the system and constructing a false alibi to maliciously incriminate Hupp to recover the money his wife had signed away. They failed to convince the re-trial court beyond a reasonable doubt. But it was not the job of the court to find Russ Faria innocent, because to do that in this situation would infringe on Hupp's presumption of innocence. But he is, like everyone, entitled to the full and untrammelled presumption of innocence.

The retrial court was persuaded that it was a plausible possibility that Pamela Hupp dipped Russ Faria's slippers in blood and hid them in the bottom of a closet for the police to find - but it did not make a finding of fact that this happened.
The retrial court was persuaded that it was a plausible possibility that Pamela Hupp hacked into Betsy Faria computer five days before her murder and created a document saying how afraid she was of her husband - but it did not make a finding of fact that this took place.

So Russ Faria is still available as alternative suspect in any consideration of the guilt of Pamela Hupp, but otherwise is presumed innocent. Just as we considered Pamela Hupp as an alternative suspect in consideration of the guilt of Russ Faria, but otherwise she is presumed innocent. This balances the rights of both.

If we reduce justice to a formulistic procedure of alibis, cell phone pings and atm withdrawals there is danger that some people will be tempted to game the system and send the innocent to jail. So we should respect the fact that police, who had the advantage of face to face interaction with both people, found Pamela Hupp neither dishonest or disturbing.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:18 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:I agree with McGirr. Without the alibi, Russ is toast.


It warms my heart to see how concerned you are that no one should be convicted simply on the basis of the absence of an alibi - unless her name happens to be Pamela Hupp, in which case it is pip and dandy.

It seems to me that there are two competing presumptions of innocence. There is Russ Faria, who has faced trial been convicted and had that conviction overturned as not being beyond reasonable doubt. Then there is Pamela Hupp for which the only evidence against her is that she was visiting her terminally ill friend very close to the TOD. We also need to respect her presumption of innocence and balance that with Russ Faria's.

The police, who interviewed both, were convinced that Russ Faria was gaming the system and constructing a false alibi to maliciously incriminate Hupp to recover the money his wife had signed away. They failed to convince the re-trial court beyond a reasonable doubt. But it was not the job of the court to find Russ Faria innocent, because to do that in this situation would infringe on Hupp's presumption of innocence. But he is, like everyone, entitled to the full and untrammelled presumption of innocence.

The retrial court was persuaded that it was a plausible possibility that Pamela Hupp dipped Russ Faria's slippers in blood and hid them in the bottom of a closet for the police to find - but it did not make a finding of fact that this happened.
The retrial court was persuaded that it was a plausible possibility that Pamela Hupp hacked into Betsy Faria computer five days before her murder and created a document saying how afraid she was of her husband - but it did not make a finding of fact that this took place.

So Russ Faria is still available as alternative suspect in any consideration of the guilt of Pamela Hupp, but otherwise is presumed innocent. Just as we considered Pamela Hupp as an alternative suspect in consideration of the guilt of Russ Faria, but otherwise she is presumed innocent. This balances the rights of both.

If we reduce justice to a formulistic procedure of alibis, cell phone pings and atm withdrawals there is danger that some people will be tempted to game the system and send the innocent to jail. So we should respect the fact that police, who had the advantage of face to face interaction with both people, found Pamela Hupp neither dishonest or disturbing.



I am not sure where you are going with this but ---- 1. it is not set in stone that the perp was either Hupp or Faria; it is entirely possible that it was some third party, 2. thus, Hupp does not have to be guilty for Russ to be innocent, 3. I supported and pushed this case because I believe it is a case of ACTUAL INNOCENCE due to the strong alibi evidence combined with careful analysis which shows he could not have had time to commit the crime between his arrival home and the 911 call, 4. the police have a tendency to "get their feet in the cement", fall victim to confirmation bias, and neglect to consider alternate theories - I don't put much stock in their decision not to pursue Hupp, 5. at this point, Hupp will be of interest as potential "wrongful conviction" case only if she is tried and convicted.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:33 am

3. I supported and pushed this case because I believe it is a case of ACTUAL INNOCENCE due to the strong alibi evidence combined with careful analysis which shows he could not have had time to commit the crime between his arrival home and the 911 call

However, it wasn't the prosecution case that he murdered his wife been his arrival home and the 911 call.

The case was he waited nearby until immediately after Hupp left and then killed his wife, after which he joined his friends to establish his alibi. As such your careful analysis was a little redundant.

It would be a reasonable assumption that Betsy Faria was dead when Hupp rang 15 minutes after she left and got no answer - although perhaps not set in stone. But if so it does restrict the scope probably to either Hupp or someone trying to deliberately incriminate Hupp. It is a small window of time for a random stranger to break in.

If I was on a jury I would probably - from what I've read - grant reasonable doubt a little reluctantly, but I would have been less willing to do so if that was seen as casting an enormous cloud of suspicion on Hupp.

Best wishes
Leclerc.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:56 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
3. I supported and pushed this case because I believe it is a case of ACTUAL INNOCENCE due to the strong alibi evidence combined with careful analysis which shows he could not have had time to commit the crime between his arrival home and the 911 call

However, it wasn't the prosecution case that he murdered his wife been his arrival home and the 911 call.

The case was he waited nearby until immediately after Hupp left and then killed his wife, after which he joined his friends to establish his alibi. As such your careful analysis was a little redundant.

It would be a reasonable assumption that Betsy Faria was dead when Hupp rang 15 minutes after she left and got no answer - although perhaps not set in stone. But if so it does restrict the scope probably to either Hupp or someone trying to deliberately incriminate Hupp. It is a small window of time for a random stranger to break in.

If I was on a jury I would probably - from what I've read - grant reasonable doubt a little reluctantly, but I would have been less willing to do so if that was seen as casting an enormous cloud of suspicion on Hupp.

Best wishes
Leclerc.



I agree that the prosecution did not argue that he committed the crime after arriving home but I thought it was the only possibility of his guilt given his alibi so I worked out the time myself and satisfied myself that it was impossible. The alibi covers the time after Hupp left and so I attached no probability to the scenario of him committing the crime earlier. Again, I don't necessarily see this as a zero sum game with Hupp - I don't see why there aren't other possibilities.
And I guess I wonder what you think. Do you have reservations about the alibi - if so, why? Do you think Hupp did it? Do you think some third party did it?
My position is pretty clear. Because of the alibi, Russ could not have done it. Other than that, I really don't know - Hupp is a possibility but a third party is also a possibility.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:14 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:I agree with McGirr. Without the alibi, Russ is toast.


It warms my heart to see how concerned you are that no one should be convicted simply on the basis of the absence of an alibi - unless her name happens to be Pamela Hupp, in which case it is pip and dandy.

So Russ Faria is still available as alternative suspect in any consideration of the guilt of Pamela Hupp, but otherwise is presumed innocent. Just as we considered Pamela Hupp as an alternative suspect in consideration of the guilt of Russ Faria, but otherwise she is presumed innocent. This balances the rights of both.



Russ Faria would not be available as an alternative suspect in the trial of Hupp. As it was physically impossible for him to commit the crime. Russ Faria did not give false and misleading statements to police.

Hupp did give false and misleading statements to the police. If anyone 'gamed' the system it was Hupp. Hupp gave ridiculous reasons for changing her statements.

Her credibility would be such that it would be expected she would invent some alternate theory. She would frame the local parish priest if she thought that would help her avoid conviction. At best Hupp is a very disturbing and dishonest person. At worst the police used her to falsely convict Russ.

Your trying to say that Hupp had no motive to kill Betsy, but if Hupp had gained the insurance policy by some form of trickery or fraud then she had a motive to kill Betsy and in a short time, and I think it unlikely that Betsy would trust the money to a complete stranger.

Hupp is not an honest and righteous person.

Whomever killed Betsy was not a normal hit man. If a hitman did kill Betsy on contract then it was deliberately made to look like a highly emotional rage killing implicating the spouse.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby His Grey Eminence » Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:20 pm

I agree that the prosecution did not argue that he committed the crime after arriving home but I thought it was the only possibility of his guilt given his alibi so I worked out the time myself and satisfied myself that it was impossible. The alibi covers the time after Hupp left and so I attached no probability to the scenario of him committing the crime earlier. Again, I don't necessarily see this as a zero sum game with Hupp - I don't see why there aren't other possibilities.
And I guess I wonder what you think. Do you have reservations about the alibi - if so, why? Do you think Hupp did it? Do you think some third party did it?
My position is pretty clear. Because of the alibi, Russ could not have done it. Other than that, I really don't know - Hupp is a possibility but a third party is also a possibility.

I think we may be talking past each. You seem to be of the opinion that stumblebum cops were charging a guy without realising his alibi precluded him. Stumblebum cops knew he had an alibi, they simply believed his friends were deliberately lying to protect. If you say if 4 people say a defendant was somewhere else then I want damn good evidence before I disbelieve them, that is one thing. But you seem to be saying that because 4 people say a defendant was elsewhere at the verifiable TOD, then he MUST be innocent - that is something else.

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)


If I assume Betsy Faria wrote this then I have to think the most likely explanation is that Russ Faria killed her, gamed his alibi and tried to implicate Hupp. If a wife says she is afraid of husband and asks that this be shown to police if anything happens to her, then the husband is the obvious suspect.
I can't say Pamela Hupp didn't hack into Betsy Faria's laptop and write this draft 5 days before her murder, but there is no evidence to suggest that and it seems far-fetched.
After that it simply becomes a matter for the courts determine if the police have managed to find enough evidence to reach the BARD standard and break Russ Faria's alibi and it appears they did not. For me the case would be closed and I wouldn't be looking for further suspects.
His Grey Eminence
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Sun Dec 20, 2015 12:01 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:
I agree that the prosecution did not argue that he committed the crime after arriving home but I thought it was the only possibility of his guilt given his alibi so I worked out the time myself and satisfied myself that it was impossible. The alibi covers the time after Hupp left and so I attached no probability to the scenario of him committing the crime earlier. Again, I don't necessarily see this as a zero sum game with Hupp - I don't see why there aren't other possibilities.
And I guess I wonder what you think. Do you have reservations about the alibi - if so, why? Do you think Hupp did it? Do you think some third party did it?
My position is pretty clear. Because of the alibi, Russ could not have done it. Other than that, I really don't know - Hupp is a possibility but a third party is also a possibility.

I think we may be talking past each. You seem to be of the opinion that stumblebum cops were charging a guy without realising his alibi precluded him. Stumblebum cops knew he had an alibi, they simply believed his friends were deliberately lying to protect. If you say if 4 people say a defendant was somewhere else then I want damn good evidence before I disbelieve them, that is one thing. But you seem to be saying that because 4 people say a defendant was elsewhere at the verifiable TOD, then he MUST be innocent - that is something else.

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)


If I assume Betsy Faria wrote this then I have to think the most likely explanation is that Russ Faria killed her, gamed his alibi and tried to implicate Hupp. If a wife says she is afraid of husband and asks that this be shown to police if anything happens to her, then the husband is the obvious suspect.
I can't say Pamela Hupp didn't hack into Betsy Faria's laptop and write this draft 5 days before her murder, but there is no evidence to suggest that and it seems far-fetched.
After that it simply becomes a matter for the courts determine if the police have managed to find enough evidence to reach the BARD standard and break Russ Faria's alibi and it appears they did not. For me the case would be closed and I wouldn't be looking for further suspects.



Why wouldn't you look for other suspects (do you include Pam in "other suspects")? Do you assume Russ did it but they just can't find him guilty BARD? So how do you explain the alibi testimony of 4 witnesses? Or are you saying that you are 100% sure it must be either Russ or Pam and, therefore, it is pointless to look for anyone else (other than those two)? And where are you on the choice between Russ and Pam?
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:48 am

erasmus44 wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:
I agree that the prosecution did not argue that he committed the crime after arriving home but I thought it was the only possibility of his guilt given his alibi so I worked out the time myself and satisfied myself that it was impossible. The alibi covers the time after Hupp left and so I attached no probability to the scenario of him committing the crime earlier. Again, I don't necessarily see this as a zero sum game with Hupp - I don't see why there aren't other possibilities.
And I guess I wonder what you think. Do you have reservations about the alibi - if so, why? Do you think Hupp did it? Do you think some third party did it?
My position is pretty clear. Because of the alibi, Russ could not have done it. Other than that, I really don't know - Hupp is a possibility but a third party is also a possibility.

I think we may be talking past each. You seem to be of the opinion that stumblebum cops were charging a guy without realising his alibi precluded him. Stumblebum cops knew he had an alibi, they simply believed his friends were deliberately lying to protect. If you say if 4 people say a defendant was somewhere else then I want damn good evidence before I disbelieve them, that is one thing. But you seem to be saying that because 4 people say a defendant was elsewhere at the verifiable TOD, then he MUST be innocent - that is something else.

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)


If I assume Betsy Faria wrote this then I have to think the most likely explanation is that Russ Faria killed her, gamed his alibi and tried to implicate Hupp. If a wife says she is afraid of husband and asks that this be shown to police if anything happens to her, then the husband is the obvious suspect.
I can't say Pamela Hupp didn't hack into Betsy Faria's laptop and write this draft 5 days before her murder, but there is no evidence to suggest that and it seems far-fetched.
After that it simply becomes a matter for the courts determine if the police have managed to find enough evidence to reach the BARD standard and break Russ Faria's alibi and it appears they did not. For me the case would be closed and I wouldn't be looking for further suspects.



Why wouldn't you look for other suspects (do you include Pam in "other suspects")? Do you assume Russ did it but they just can't find him guilty BARD? So how do you explain the alibi testimony of 4 witnesses? Or are you saying that you are 100% sure it must be either Russ or Pam and, therefore, it is pointless to look for anyone else (other than those two)? And where are you on the choice between Russ and Pam?


I don't believe His Grey Eminence has any interest in having a reasonable conversation. He appears to be here just to take shots at IIP cases. Some people need to find better hobbies.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:48 am

His Grey Eminence wrote:

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)



So in your hypothesis Russ is innocent of hiring a contract killer and you also rule out home invasion or random killing. Russ had an iron cast alibi and there was no evidence in the CCTV footage of his leaving his friends at any time other than what was sworn into evidence. You accusation would hinge heavily on the alibi. Essentially in your theory either Hupp was the killer or Russ was. Russ had 4 witnesses that have no reason that you have offered thus far as to why they might lie to cover a murder.

Therefore based on your theory Hupp is the killer.....or another suspect!

You also claim that whomever was the killer tried to frame Russ or the killer was Russ. So possibly that might explain the letter also.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Tue Dec 29, 2015 7:19 am

While I believe that Hupp, or possibly her husband, is almost certainly the killer, I cannot see proving it in a court of law. Might be able to do it in a civil trial however.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:57 am

McGirr wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)



So in your hypothesis Russ is innocent of hiring a contract killer and you also rule out home invasion or random killing. Russ had an iron cast alibi and there was no evidence in the CCTV footage of his leaving his friends at any time other than what was sworn into evidence. You accusation would hinge heavily on the alibi. Essentially in your theory either Hupp was the killer or Russ was. Russ had 4 witnesses that have no reason that you have offered thus far as to why they might lie to cover a murder.

Therefore based on your theory Hupp is the killer.....or another suspect!


Our friend seems to 1. make a few provocative comments attacking other people's conclusions, 2. slip in suggestive statements, but 3. never really set forth where he is on an issue or what he thinks happened or even how he thinks the process should have played out. He should consider becoming a Washington D.C. "political pundit."
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:58 am

McGirr wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)



So in your hypothesis Russ is innocent of hiring a contract killer and you also rule out home invasion or random killing. Russ had an iron cast alibi and there was no evidence in the CCTV footage of his leaving his friends at any time other than what was sworn into evidence. You accusation would hinge heavily on the alibi. Essentially in your theory either Hupp was the killer or Russ was. Russ had 4 witnesses that have no reason that you have offered thus far as to why they might lie to cover a murder.

Therefore based on your theory Hupp is the killer.....or another suspect!


Our friend seems to 1. make a few provocative comments attacking other people's conclusions, 2. slip in suggestive statements, but 3. never really set forth where he is on an issue or what he thinks happened or even how he thinks the process should have played out. He should consider becoming a Washington D.C. "political pundit."
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:59 am

McGirr wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)



So in your hypothesis Russ is innocent of hiring a contract killer and you also rule out home invasion or random killing. Russ had an iron cast alibi and there was no evidence in the CCTV footage of his leaving his friends at any time other than what was sworn into evidence. You accusation would hinge heavily on the alibi. Essentially in your theory either Hupp was the killer or Russ was. Russ had 4 witnesses that have no reason that you have offered thus far as to why they might lie to cover a murder.

Therefore based on your theory Hupp is the killer.....or another suspect!


Our friend seems to 1. make a few provocative comments attacking other people's conclusions, 2. slip in suggestive statements, but 3. never really set forth where he is on an issue or what he thinks happened or even how he thinks the process should have played out. He should consider becoming a Washington D.C. "political pundit."
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:59 am

McGirr wrote:
His Grey Eminence wrote:

The TOD can be narrowly defined between 19:00 pm (Hupp brought Betsy Faria home) and 19:20 when she didn't answer a series of phone calls from Hupp and her daughters. The fact that Russ Faria's slippers were stained with her blood and hidden in the bottom of a closet suggests strongly either Faria or someone trying to incriminate him was responsible. That would rule out a random home invasion to me.

Consider the draft of a letter found on Betsy Faria's laptop written 5 days before her death.
http://fox2now.com/2015/11/04/pam-hupps ... a-retrial/
the letter started 'Pam' and talked about life insurance saying (Do you think I can put it in your name?) Another line said (I`m afraid of staying alone with Russ) and another line read (If something happens to me please show this to police)



So in your hypothesis Russ is innocent of hiring a contract killer and you also rule out home invasion or random killing. Russ had an iron cast alibi and there was no evidence in the CCTV footage of his leaving his friends at any time other than what was sworn into evidence. You accusation would hinge heavily on the alibi. Essentially in your theory either Hupp was the killer or Russ was. Russ had 4 witnesses that have no reason that you have offered thus far as to why they might lie to cover a murder.

Therefore based on your theory Hupp is the killer.....or another suspect!


Our friend seems to 1. make a few provocative comments attacking other people's conclusions, 2. slip in suggestive statements, but 3. never really set forth where he is on an issue or what he thinks happened or even how he thinks the process should have played out. He should consider becoming a Washington D.C. "political pundit."
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 12:50 pm

Sorry.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Tue Dec 29, 2015 9:48 pm

erasmus44 wrote:Sorry.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really tried that what's that tells me and then just gave up.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:18 pm

McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:Sorry.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really tried that what's that tells me and then just gave up.



I was used to the old Supertanker system where we got paid by the word and the number of posts and I got carried away because I am short on spare change this time of the month.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Tue Dec 29, 2015 11:38 pm

erasmus44 wrote:
McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:Sorry.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really tried that what's that tells me and then just gave up.



I was used to the old Supertanker system where we got paid by the word and the number of posts and I got carried away because I am short on spare change this time of the month.


Yeah, Then your fired! :winks:
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 11:52 pm

McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:
McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:Sorry.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really tried that what's that tells me and then just gave up.



I was used to the old Supertanker system where we got paid by the word and the number of posts and I got carried away because I am short on spare change this time of the month.


Yeah, Then your fired! :winks:


Thanks. I was planning to quit but now I can collect unemployment. By the way, you will probably also be receiving a complaint in an age discrimination lawsuit in a week or so.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:13 am

erasmus44 wrote:
McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:
McGirr wrote:
erasmus44 wrote:Sorry.



:lol: :lol: :lol:

You really tried that what's that tells me and then just gave up.



I was used to the old Supertanker system where we got paid by the word and the number of posts and I got carried away because I am short on spare change this time of the month.


Yeah, Then your fired! :winks:


Thanks. I was planning to quit but now I can collect unemployment. By the way, you will probably also be receiving a complaint in an age discrimination lawsuit in a week or so.


Were we that bad! Man I am so sorry. Erasmus tasus we forgot to give your employee of the month award, it's in the post.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Wed Dec 30, 2015 1:16 am

I certainly appreciate the gesture - by the way, it is long overdue. I will wait for it to arrive in the mail and then I will have to think this whole thing over and consult with my lawyer before making any commitments.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:31 am

Dateline will have a feature on this case tonight.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Sat Jan 23, 2016 10:04 am

I saw most of it, and it was pretty good. I have been looking into the use of luminol in this case, and it is very much like that case in Perugia with what's her name and what's his name.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:26 pm

I missed it because all of our network affiliates were spending full time telling us that it is snowing outside.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:15 pm

The cops sprayed luminol after the family had moved back into the house. Then they the lied about the results (springing the investigation as a surprise at the trial) and withheld the photographs.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:24 pm

Chris_Halkides wrote:The cops sprayed luminol after the family had moved back into the house. Then they the lied about the results (springing the investigation as a surprise at the trial) and withheld the photographs.


And of course, there is no accountability.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Thu Feb 11, 2016 3:58 pm

What is really distressing is that when the photographs were turned over to the defense in the second trial, they did not show the shoe prints that the cops said were there. And no accountability for that, unless I am mistaken.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:48 pm

Well, the murderess is still trying to hang onto her stolen money
http://fox2now.com/2016/02/09/the-secre ... ms-150000/
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:15 pm

The reporter on this story, Chris Hayes, has been doing some good work.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Sarah » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:54 pm

Stunning ruling coming out:

Judge rules Pam Hupp can keep Betsy Faria’s life insurance proceeds

http://fox2now.com/2016/02/25/judge-rules-pam-hupp-can-keep-betsy-farias-life-insurance-proceeds/
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Feb 26, 2016 1:30 am

Not only got away with murder but got away with the money. . . . .
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:15 pm

Sarah wrote:Stunning ruling coming out:

Judge rules Pam Hupp can keep Betsy Faria’s life insurance proceeds

http://fox2now.com/2016/02/25/judge-rules-pam-hupp-can-keep-betsy-farias-life-insurance-proceeds/


The legal system has to start with the assumption that the listed beneficiary gets the proceeds of the policy. It takes very clear evidence to overcome that presumption. So the result is not really that surprising.
What was always surprising was that the vic would make this decision. It could be overturned if one could show undue influence of that the vic was in such a bad state that she could not make a meaningful decision on such a matter.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Sat Feb 27, 2016 9:33 am

With respect to the luminol evidence in this case, I think that the luminol did a very good job of showing where the dog was fed a pork chop.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Sat Feb 27, 2016 1:10 pm

My take on the recent ruling.

Sociopathic Liar Pam Hupp Allowed To Keep Betsy Faria Life Insurance Payout
http://www.groundreport.com/sociopathic-liar-pam-hupp-allowed-to-keep-betsy-faria-life-insurance-payout/
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:44 pm

Chris_Halkides wrote:With respect to the luminol evidence in this case, I think that the luminol did a very good job of showing where the dog was fed a pork chop.

Today I found a recent paper (doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.12352) that indicates that the root nodules from legumes give false positives in some tests, such as the Kastle-Meyer presumptive test for blood: "Nodules crushed onto clothing, and then air-dried or frozen, continued to yield positive phenolphthalein test results after 4 years." This is not entirely surprising in retrospect; there is a protein called leghemoglobin that might be supposed have a pseudo-peroxidase activity similar to hemoglobin (which is apparently a correct supposition). The authors go on to point out exactly how a DNA profile extracted from such a stain might be incorrectly attributed to blood from the person who donated the DNA. "To create a mock casework scenario, soybean nodules (Fig. 1) were crushed onto a worn white cotton sock to simulate being stepped on by the wearer. The resulting red-brown staining gave the visual appearance of a dried bloodstain (not shown). Presumptive tests for blood yielded false-positive results using phenolphthalein and Hemastix, while negative presumptive results were obtained using Hexagon OBTI and HemaTrace."
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:06 pm

Curiouser and curiouser: http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/pam-hup ... an-n632991

Is this now the third death that Hupp has been connected to?
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:32 pm

"“He didn’t drive nor was he allowed to drive,” said Welch, the boyfriend of Gumpenberger’s aunt. “He could barely stand because of that injury and he knew his limitations.”"
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... 2ea3c.html
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby erasmus44 » Mon Aug 22, 2016 8:53 pm

lonepinealex wrote:Curiouser and curiouser: http://www.nbcnews.com/dateline/pam-hup ... an-n632991

Is this now the third death that Hupp has been connected to?



WOW!!!!!
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3162
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Chris_Halkides » Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:13 pm

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... b7287.html
http://fox2now.com/2016/08/23/pam-hupp- ... llon-home/

From the first link: "She somehow lured a gullible, brain-damaged man into her car last week and took him to her home in O'Fallon, then called 911 and emptied a revolver into his body as an operator listened, they said." To be honest, I am having a hard time following the logic of this story. Pam had the money, and to the best of my knowledge, there was no active investigation of Betsy's murder. Why would she need a "patsy?" Even if she convinced everyone that someone were extorting money from her now, what does that have to do with what happened to Betsy? That is not to say that I think that she is innocent, only that she may not be as smart as I thought. Weird; maybe she is insane.
Chris_Halkides
 
Posts: 1874
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:12 pm

Could it be that socially she is treated as Betsy Faria's murderer?
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:55 am

Chris_Halkides wrote:http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/pamela-hupp-charged-with-first-degree-murder-at-her-home/article_916845ac-de2f-5d1e-ae5d-2b11a25b7287.html
http://fox2now.com/2016/08/23/pam-hupp- ... llon-home/

From the first link: "She somehow lured a gullible, brain-damaged man into her car last week and took him to her home in O'Fallon, then called 911 and emptied a revolver into his body as an operator listened, they said." To be honest, I am having a hard time following the logic of this story. Pam had the money, and to the best of my knowledge, there was no active investigation of Betsy's murder. Why would she need a "patsy?" Even if she convinced everyone that someone were extorting money from her now, what does that have to do with what happened to Betsy? That is not to say that I think that she is innocent, only that she may not be as smart as I thought. Weird; maybe she is insane.


I don't think she's smart at all. She only got away with Betsy's murder because of the incompetence of the Lincoln County LE and prosecutor. Look how many times she changed her story during the Faria trials - it stinks to high heaven. She got extremely lucky, until now.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby jane » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:32 am

lonepinealex wrote:
Chris_Halkides wrote:http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/pamela-hupp-charged-with-first-degree-murder-at-her-home/article_916845ac-de2f-5d1e-ae5d-2b11a25b7287.html
http://fox2now.com/2016/08/23/pam-hupp- ... llon-home/

From the first link: "She somehow lured a gullible, brain-damaged man into her car last week and took him to her home in O'Fallon, then called 911 and emptied a revolver into his body as an operator listened, they said." To be honest, I am having a hard time following the logic of this story. Pam had the money, and to the best of my knowledge, there was no active investigation of Betsy's murder. Why would she need a "patsy?" Even if she convinced everyone that someone were extorting money from her now, what does that have to do with what happened to Betsy? That is not to say that I think that she is innocent, only that she may not be as smart as I thought. Weird; maybe she is insane.


I don't think she's smart at all. She only got away with Betsy's murder because of the incompetence of the Lincoln County LE and prosecutor. Look how many times she changed her story during the Faria trials - it stinks to high heaven. She got extremely lucky, until now.


Stranger than fiction.
jane
 
Posts: 2720
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Bruce Fischer » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:02 pm

Hupp didn't really do anything miraculous to cover things up after Betsy's murder. Investigators simply failed to properly investigate. It's not surprising that Hupp messed up her plan this time around. Cell phone location is criminal mischief 101. If she couldn't get that right, I have no doubt that she left much more to find.
"This could happen to any one of you. If you don't believe it could happen, you are either misinformed or in a state of deep denial" -- Debra Milke
User avatar
Bruce Fischer
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: USA

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:13 pm

Bruce Fischer wrote:Hupp didn't really do anything miraculous to cover things up after Betsy's murder. Investigators simply failed to properly investigate. It's not surprising that Hupp messed up her plan this time around. Cell phone location is criminal mischief 101. If she couldn't get that right, I have no doubt that she left much more to find.


You hit on one of my important thoughts with regards to criminal cases in general. . . . .Whenever the cops / prosecutors try to argue that someone is a criminal mastermind, my skeptic radar immediately goes off. Maybe it is true but I want some significant evidence before I believe it.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby lonepinealex » Thu Aug 25, 2016 9:25 am

Feds investigating the Betsy Faria murder: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... 92ad8.html

No wonder Pam was feeling the heat.
lonepinealex
 
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: UK

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby McGirr » Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:55 pm

How could that diabolical woman be so ignorant of the very evidence that raised suspicion against her during the Faria case; the mobile phone records and locations and regarding her inconsistent statements with contrast to her mobile phone recorded beacon locations that she could go and do exactly the same routine again and be caught in the same manner. This St Louis drama never ceases and just keeps growing. Hearst while I used to fear for Russ Faria would drown in the injustice of Lincoln, but now this has begun to turn and envelope and spread into an unstoppable drama of pulitzer proportions.
fuhgeddaboudit
User avatar
McGirr
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:11 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Russ Faria Case Discussion

Postby Desert Fox » Sat Aug 27, 2016 2:06 pm

Pam Hupp, assuming she is guilty, is a strange case where she seems to be both conniving yet stupid at the same time. . . . In many ways she fits into a TV caricature.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Russ Faria Case

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest