Part 12 Guy Heinze Jr.
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1135 Apr 5, 2014
As one who was there and heard all of the evidence at the trial, I must say that the BBC documentary, if anything, was slanted towards the prosecution. It left out the bloody nunchucks which were never logged into evidence, and the fact that the prosecution called the park manager a liar, until the 911 tape was played where she called and turned those nunchucks over to a police investigator. If left out the fact that this was the same police investigator who contaminated the evidence by putting Mr. Heinze's clothing in the same bag against police protocol, and did not log it into evidence until two days later. It left out the fact that this investigator was fired by his own police agency and refused to appear at trial and be subjected to cross-examination about his mishandling of evidence. It left out the hammer that was also found at the scene but never logged into evidence. It left out the lost video tape of the trailer park that was collected but never logged into evidence.

Also, FYI Georgia law allows an alternative form of appeal, called a Motion for New Trial, which has been filed on Mr. Heinze's behalf by his lawyers.

If there was ever a case of reasonable doubt, this was it. However, the citizens of Glynn County could not bear the thought that their police had messed up so bad, and there are several mass murderers still at large. It is easier to convict an innocent man and say "Job well done to their police department."
Local Ga Gal

Townsend, GA

#1136 Apr 5, 2014
wusatdatrial wrote:
As one who was there and heard all of the evidence at the trial, I must say that the BBC documentary, if anything, was slanted towards the prosecution. It left out the bloody nunchucks which were never logged into evidence, and the fact that the prosecution called the park manager a liar, until the 911 tape was played where she called and turned those nunchucks over to a police investigator. If left out the fact that this was the same police investigator who contaminated the evidence by putting Mr. Heinze's clothing in the same bag against police protocol, and did not log it into evidence until two days later. It left out the fact that this investigator was fired by his own police agency and refused to appear at trial and be subjected to cross-examination about his mishandling of evidence. It left out the hammer that was also found at the scene but never logged into evidence. It left out the lost video tape of the trailer park that was collected but never logged into evidence.
Also, FYI Georgia law allows an alternative form of appeal, called a Motion for New Trial, which has been filed on Mr. Heinze's behalf by his lawyers.
If there was ever a case of reasonable doubt, this was it. However, the citizens of Glynn County could not bear the thought that their police had messed up so bad, and there are several mass murderers still at large. It is easier to convict an innocent man and say "Job well done to their police department."
Amen!!! Very well said.....
Local Ga Gal

Townsend, GA

#1137 Apr 5, 2014
wusatdatrial wrote:
As one who was there and heard all of the evidence at the trial, I must say that the BBC documentary, if anything, was slanted towards the prosecution. It left out the bloody nunchucks which were never logged into evidence, and the fact that the prosecution called the park manager a liar, until the 911 tape was played where she called and turned those nunchucks over to a police investigator. If left out the fact that this was the same police investigator who contaminated the evidence by putting Mr. Heinze's clothing in the same bag against police protocol, and did not log it into evidence until two days later. It left out the fact that this investigator was fired by his own police agency and refused to appear at trial and be subjected to cross-examination about his mishandling of evidence. It left out the hammer that was also found at the scene but never logged into evidence. It left out the lost video tape of the trailer park that was collected but never logged into evidence.
Also, FYI Georgia law allows an alternative form of appeal, called a Motion for New Trial, which has been filed on Mr. Heinze's behalf by his lawyers.
If there was ever a case of reasonable doubt, this was it. However, the citizens of Glynn County could not bear the thought that their police had messed up so bad, and there are several mass murderers still at large. It is easier to convict an innocent man and say "Job well done to their police department."
Oh but do you have any proof of the motion for a new trial cuz apparently Guilty says since he couldn't find any proof that they didn't file. I know they sid cuz I know them on a personal level.
Caring

Albany, GA

#1138 Apr 5, 2014
Guilty, when you get time search other UK blogs look at a lot of their comments on the same subject. Quite interesting compared to the tiny few Brits who have chimed in here about GHJ.:)

I admit I was rather curious to see if all Brits were just blind sheeple followers of GHJ and much to my surprise .........they aren't. I have taken over two hours of my time to read several UK blogs this morning about the Heinz case. It was refreshing to see countless Brits who didn't buy what GHJ was trying to sell.

And I even saw some posters from the UK say they wish they had the death penalty in their country and feel the UK is too light on murder defendant Quite interesting to say the least.

Many did not try to dismiss every piece of evidence against GHJ or compartmentalize it which CE never is. In fact they did like they are supposed to do, and linked all the circumstantial evidence together in its overall totality, like it is suppose to be done.

One of the points made over and over again by those who are convinced of his guilt was the fact that the blood of his victim was found INSIDE his underwear. They said the defense never did explain it away based on what GJ said he did upon walking into the trailer and finding his family members dead.

Oh also another very good point some of them brought up was the fact that his bloody print was found INSIDE a CLOSED drawer in Michael's bedroom where MT kept his medication. And they linked that up with the fact that Michael's medication bottle being found in Heinze' vehicle he was driving. Seems to be a lot of intelligent Brits that are critical thinkers after all.

Oh and another UK poster made another great point about some saying that he couldn't have done this alone. They said then that would mean all the others before him who have been able to murder multiple victims at one time by bludgeoning them all to death, wouldn't have been able to do it either. She/he said, but time and time again it has been proven they absolutely did do it, and alone. So he/she felt those that wanted to believe was just supposition/speculation which didn't have any credible facts to support it. And there were prior cases showing it has already been done before. Bravo to whomever this UK poster is!

AND there was a lot of discussion about him lying about the stolen gun and why it was in his vehicle when having the blood of the victim on it. With the butt of the stock being shattered, the posters said, it showed it had been used to wield horrific blows. He/she said if the stock had been damaged beforehand the defense would have someone testify to that and he didn't.

Of course there was also a lot of discussion about the cell phone being found in the vehicle he was driving that belonged to one of the dead female victims and had the blood of another murdered victim on it belonging to her boyfriend, Joe.

So now that I know there really are some very smart, and intelligent Brits out there that DO KNOW HOW to link all the circumstantial evidence together, I am relieved and quite impressed.

So these few groupies here that denies glaring CE when they see it and have no clue how CE is to be linked up....... doesn't bother me nearly as much now that I know many other Brits think he is guilty as hell, and is glad that he has been locked up for life.
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1139 Apr 5, 2014
But wait, there is more. The BBC forgot to mention the bloody fingerprint on the bedroom wall that could have only come from a perpetrator, and it did not match Guy Heinz. Or the fact that the police instructed the Crime Lab not to test it any further. What were they afraid they would find? The real killer or killers.

Or the fact that the blood on the shorts was not blood spatter, but rather blood transfer, like the kind that would have gotten there with evidence that was contaminated by the detective who left it in the trunk of his car for two days before logging it in.

Or the fact that the police department did not consult with an outside agency, like the GBI to help process this very unusual crime scene. Why did they not want the help of highly trained crime scene experts?(Note: They did ask a single GBI agent on day 4 of the crime scene investigation how to apply certain chemicals, because they did not know how or what to use to check for finger prints. Why wait 4 days until the scene is contaminated beyond repair to consult the experts?)

Or the fact that the Forensic Pathologist said conclusively that the shotgun in the trunk of the car WAS NOT THE MURDER WEAPON. And they never found the missing barrel, and the pathologist only speculated that it could have been used.

Or the fact that the police piled all of the evidence into one bathtub, where it was contaminated beyond use. Or the crime scene video showing police officers not wearing tyvek suits or booties, further contaminating every room in the crime scene. Or that the lead investigator did not go to the crime scene until day 4 of the investigation.

Or the fact that the person who supposedly found that bloody piece of paper did not testify at trial. The officer who did testify did not know whether the paper was found inside or outside of the drawer. He was on the other side of the room. You would think the person that actually found it would have wanted to come in and clear that up.(Note: The DA merely speculated to the jury that it might have been in the drawer.)

Or the fact that the police threw away the bloody droplets found in a bathroom that could have only been made by a perpetrator, but kept an empty pizza box with no evidentiary value.

Or the fact that there was no motive for Mr. Heinze to kill the family that he loved.(Other that the bogus statement supposedly made at work, except that Mr. Heinze had been laid off from that job over a year earlier.)

They also left out the threat overheard by one of the neighbors several days earlier against one of the victims, by a man who said he would come back and kill his whole family. And the 8 or 10 other crimestopper tips that were ignore.

Or the fact the cell phone was never used by Mr. Heinze. The last call was placed by one of the victims to a friend about 3 am, and it was only introduced to show the victims were alive at 3 am.

I could go on. The bottom line is that someone had to pay, and the only person on trial was Guy Heinze. Wake up people. What do you think reasonable doubt means? If you watched the BBC and wondered how they found Mr. Heinze guilty, you should have attended the trial. Even the jurors on the video acknowledged that they had reasonable doubt.

PS> The clerk of court records show where the Motion for New Trial was filed.
Caring

Albany, GA

#1140 Apr 5, 2014
Twist much?

If you were at the trial you must have dozed off or you just enjoy twisting things.

The print was never tested so Heinz WASN'T ruled out. So that is a bald face lie. Do you realize even with your own post about this it makes no sense what you have written. First you say he was ruled out and then says it was not tested. Baaaaaaaaaawhaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

They didn't specifically say not to test it. Show me proof where they told anyone to make sure they dont test THAT? LE never tests everything in such a bloody crime scene. So trying to say they specifically didn't want this piece tested is another biased lie.

The bloody droplets found in the bathroom had no evidentiary value. They were droplets of blood from the victims that were dripping off GHJs hands..

It doesn't matter who testified at trial. The fingerprint expert DID testify and said they were the prints of GJH comingled in the blood of the victim. The fingerprint expert identifies prints. Not the one who collected it.

And your so called facts about his clothing are also lacking full disclosure of the actual facts admitted at trial.

When he was arrested the morning of Aug. 29, 2009, Heinze's gym shorts were SPOTTED with the blood of Russell Toler Sr. and two of his slain children, Chrissy and Michael..

There was a big blood smear on KHAKI shorts he wore over the gym shorts, and in the car Heinze was driving police found Michelle Toler's cell phone with the blood of Chrissy Toler's slain boyfriend, Joseph West, on it, Daras testified. Blood transfers are smears ........not spots.

That is just a bunch of crap. There was never any evidence that the dead victim used her own cell phone at 3am. In fact there isn't any proof that she was even alive at 3am. The phone wasn't useable but GJ didn't know that, and tried to make calls. The young girl you blame for using the phone would already know her phone wasn't useable. He wouldn't though. The calls were made about 3:45 a.m., just over four hours be Heinze told police he came home and found all the bodies.

But Jr does put himself at the scene at 2am when he (cough cough) said he came back but didn't go inside of his own home. Imo, the argument started around midnight, and he left then came back at 2am when he knew they would all be sound asleep and that is when the murders began. With them all dead he could go party in Jrs car, take Michael's drugs with him and take the cell phone to call his thug buddies including his brother.

Motive is not an element to be proved. However the evidence gathered showed what the motive was. He was driving a vehicle belong to a man who never ever ever let anyone drive his car. Not even his own father. The closed drawer held MTs medication. The closed drawer that when opened had the bloody print of the suspect on a piece of paper. Testified and verified that it belonged to GHJ. Not once did he say he ever opened up any drawers when he returned. The medication bottle was found in the suspect's vehicle. The phone was also found in the suspect vehicle which had Joe's blood on it.

Another falsehood. The statement was never proved to be bogus when the witness testified Jr wanted to kill all of his people.
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1141 Apr 5, 2014
Funny, I don't remember seeing you in the courtroom. Where were you sitting?
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1142 Apr 5, 2014
About the fingerprint, go back and read my posting. The fingerprint was tested and they RULED OUT Guy Heinze. They then went back and instructed the GBI not to test for any other matches. The email from Det. Darius to the GBI was admitted into evidence without objection. "DO NOT DO ANY FURTHER TESTING" Look it up!
Caring

Leesburg, GA

#1143 Apr 5, 2014
wusatdatrial wrote:
About the fingerprint, go back and read my posting. The fingerprint was tested and they RULED OUT Guy Heinze. They then went back and instructed the GBI not to test for any other matches. The email from Det. Darius to the GBI was admitted into evidence without objection. "DO NOT DO ANY FURTHER TESTING" Look it up!
That's not the way it works. You said it..........now back it up with a link.

What fingerprint?

I am talking about the bloody handprint that was found in the bedroom.

This is what Darris testified to verbatim.

"At the time, we had so much evidence against Mr. Heinze,'' it was deemed UNNESSARY to HAVE THE HANDPRINT ANALYIZED, Darris testified.
Caring

Leesburg, GA

#1144 Apr 5, 2014
Correction on verbatim testimony of Darris.

"At the time, we had so much evidence against Mr. Heinze, it was deemed unnecessary to have the handprint analyzed, Darris testified.

Sorry for the misspells in my post above.
Guilty

United States

#1145 Apr 6, 2014
wusatdatrial wrote:
PS> The clerk of court records show where the Motion for New Trial was filed.
No one asked where it was filed. All motions for a new trial are filed in the trial court. The question was if it was filed because there has been no record of it in the news which is odd in such a high profile case. But thanks for proving once again that you will say/make up anything for your mass murdering boo. lol!
MissEvansofLondo n

London, UK

#1146 Apr 6, 2014
I've watched and read most of the details concerning Guy's trial, I think its disgusting how he has been treated, so many mistakes made in the investigation, I personally believe he is not guilty, and after watching a recent documentry on him felt very upset and sorry for him, although others may disagree, we're entitled to our opinion. I hope he finds peace.
Local Neighbor

Washington, DC

#1147 Apr 7, 2014
Across the seas wrote:
I believe guy didn't do it, the fact the Americans that do believe he did just shows what small minded arrogant lazy people they are, the chief clearly fucked up with evidence yet no one seems to believe there's something wrong with that he probably didn't bother doing his job properly because he didn't see the point. Pin it on the family member who found then was probably all he was thinking let's face it he didn't have much else too loose did he. The police force can't do their jobs properly.
FREE GUY HEINZE JR.
If we free him, can he come over and stay with you and your family in your home? Hmmm, thought not.
Caring

Albany, GA

#1148 Apr 7, 2014
talleigh wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really comparing these two murders?!... Its not about how many people were killed but the way in which they were killed...
Woolfolk.... Tom's father, fifty-four; Tom's stepmother, forty-one; their six children, Richard Jr., twenty; Pearl, seventeen; Annie, ten; Rosebud, seven; Charlie, five; and baby Mattie, eighteen months; and Mrs. Temperance West, eighty-four
3 adults 1 teen 3 children and an old lady... with an ax!!
Heinze family.... 1 child, 1 teen and 7 adults of which 5 were men... who suffered in total more that 220 wounds!!!... Thats not a quick, quiet or easy thing to do especially when evidence of people fighting back was observed..
Two compare the two cases and all they entail just because of the number of victims is quite frankly ridiculous.
Ga. trial flashes back to 1887 mass slaying of 9

The medical examiner said he knew of two crimes. One was the infamous case of Richard Speck, who stabbed and strangled eight student nurses after holding them captive for hours at a Chicago townhouse in July 1966. The second was a lesser-known case from middle Georgia: the 19th century ax murders attributed to Thomas G. Woolfolk.

Woolfolk was the 27-year-old son of a businessman and landowner. He lived with his father, stepmother and several half-siblings in Bibb County at a rural farmhouse outside Macon. On the morning of Aug. 6, 1887, Woolfolk came running to neighbors for help. He said an attacker had broken into the house in the middle of the night and killed the rest of his family. Woolfolk said he escaped by jumping from a window.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/ga-trial-fl...
Caring

Albany, GA

#1149 Apr 7, 2014
MissEvansofLondon wrote:
I've watched and read most of the details concerning Guy's trial, I think its disgusting how he has been treated, so many mistakes made in the investigation, I personally believe he is not guilty, and after watching a recent documentry on him felt very upset and sorry for him, although others may disagree, we're entitled to our opinion. I hope he finds peace.
What is disgusting is seeing anyone take up for this murdering bastard. Thank goodness the jury gave justice to the victims he slaughtered.

In the documentary was this ever cleared up or it even mentioned?

"If he goes back and forth to every room, how did he have no blood on the bottom of his shoes?" Darris said. Why did he lie about buying the shotgun for $25? Why did he lie when he said he had smoked marijuana with Joe West before Joe died yet JW didn't have any marijuana in his system? Why did he lie and say he checked on everyone yet he had no blood on the soles of his shoes? If he checked on everyone why didn't he see that Bryon was alive? The EMTs immediately heard Bryon crying?

Guy Heinze Jr.'s shorts, that forensic biologist and DNA analyst Kristen O'Malley-Fripp described as gray-black and reversible, arrived at the Georgia Bureau of Investigation crime lab Sept. 2, she testified.

She found blood on four areas of the shorts, did DNA analysis on sample cuttings and found two to be the blood of Russell Toler Sr. and the others to be the blood of Michael Toler and Chrissy Toler.

A swabbing of blood from a paper document taken from the trailer had the blood of Russell Toler Sr., she said. The bloody print found on the document belonged to Guy Heinze Jr.

She also did DNR analysis of swabbings that forensic biologist Barbara Retzer did on sandals that police took from Heinze at the jail.

One swabbing from on top of the sandals matched the blood of Joseph West and another matched Guy Heinze Sr. Soles did not have any blood on them.

(*Hmmmmmmmmmm yet he said he walked through the blood soaked scene checking on everyone????? And his lawyer made such a big deal that if ANYONE walked through the scene they would have blood on the soles of their shoes. I guess he forgot what his own client said he did but he miraculously had no blood on the bottom of his shoes.) Well the shoes he was wearing at the time (8am) when he pretended to find his entire family dead.

And why did the khaki outer shorts have blood transfers when the gym underwear have blood spatters. Two completely different blood patterns. Blood spatters are only made when the blood is airborne and traveling at a high velocity.

(Hmmmmm again, so the blood transference on the outer khaki shorts did not have Michael and Chrissy Tolar's blood on them whatsoever but both of these victims' blood were found on his underwear on the gray reversible side along with Rusty Tolar Sr.

Explain how that happened? It defies the law of physics.

He is going straight to hell. There will be no peace for him nor should there ever be. He sat there like stone and even the photos of his family torn all apart didn't faze him. Why should it? He was the one who had done this horrendous carnage, and his people in the end meant absolutely nothing to him.

Read more at Jacksonville.com : http://jacksonville.com/news/georgia/2013-10-...
Caring

Albany, GA

#1150 Apr 7, 2014
Oh and for kickers.....

Why did he lie and say he went to the convenient store with Joe and Chrissy when LE had the video tape showing he wasn't there. I know why he lied, he was trying to pretend everything between his family was peachy keen. GAG!

Why did he lie and say he left home wearing the khaki shorts? Another bald face lie they caught him in when they had video footage of him later on at a store in the early morning hours showing him wearing only the BLACK side out gym underwear type shorts?

Innocent my arse. Its as plain as day he is guilty as hell. I hope he rots and burns in hell.
Guilty

United States

#1151 Apr 7, 2014
The argument that one person could not kill 8 people is lame. It was a residence with a lot of people and therefore, they were use to some noise. They also had box fans full blasting thru out the trailer masking noise. And what do they think having your skull beat in sounds like? It's thud thud thud. The first blow would have concussed them, if not caused a skull fracture. If they were struck on the side of their heads, that is the weakest part of the skull. People are sound asleep - most on the floor. You think they are going to be able to jump up from the floor and start fighting Heinze off when brain fluid is already leaking from their nose and ears? Get real. Heinze took out the only threat -- West, first. He then went and killed the others.
missb

Sheffield, UK

#1152 Apr 8, 2014
Can someone just clarify, did the police wear protective clothing/shoes when they went onto the scene? And if not, why?
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1153 Apr 8, 2014
Sorry I could not provide a link when I said, "Look it up," but you see all of my facts came from courtroom testimony observed by my brain, so there is not link and I am told transcripts take months for that long a trial.

The whole statement that they did not test the fingerprints on the bedroom wall that did not match guy Heinze, "Because they had plenty of evidence" falls under what Mr. Knox called "confirmation bias." When you pick a suspect, you tend to ignore evidence that does not fit your theory. Once Lt. Daras knew the bloody fingerprint on the wall did not match Guy Heinze, then he did not want to know anything more. "Confirmation bias." Mr. Knox, who is a blood spatter expert, BTW and teaches at the police college in Jacksonville, says that confirmation bias is antithetical to the scientific method. Good police work requires use of the scientific method without bias towards any theory.

Another example of confirmation bias would be the fact that they threw away the clothing with bloody droplets in the bathroom.(Keep in mind Glynn County never had a blood spatter expert look at the scene) Mr. Knox noted that these were clearly droplets, because of their round shape, likely dripping from injuries of one of the perpetrators. They were not smear or spatter. Given the fact that at least two victims struggled, it was likely that one of the perps was injured. That is why there was blood in a bathroom where no one was killed or struggled. Why did the police throw it away? Same answer as before. Because we had our man. "Confirmation bias" They did not want to know what the blood evidence showed.

And if one man did this, how do you explain the fact that Rusty Towler, Jr. was being dragged out from under the table by both legs, and being beaten on the head at the same time?

And the whole notion that nobody hear the commotion because of the fans was disproved by the very first officer at the scene.(Can't remember his name) He said as we were going through the house I was in the bedroom where they found Joe Sr. and I heard a baby whimper. So I checked it out, and and there was the 2 year old child in another bedroom badly injured. He testified that he heard a "Whimper."

And if you had been in the courtroom and heard the audio on the crime scene tape, you could have heard the fans still running and police offices talking in normal voices.

And Det. Daras' theory that Mr. Heinze went in the front door, where his father and Rusty Jr. were sleeping, crept down to Rusty Sr.'s room and bludgeoned both Rusty Sr. and Michael, who struggled somewhat without waking anyone, then proceeded to the next room and held a pillow over the Aunt's face with one had, held her arm dowm with one hand and bludgeoned her through the pillow with the third hand is crazy, again with no one waking up. And over some stupid darvocets. Give me a break. He told police he had used lots of cocaine that night. Why did he need darocets. Still no one woke up.

Keep in mind that all the windows were open on this August night, and not a singe neighbor heard anything. These are not two acre Country Club estates, these are side by side single wide trailers, where the first officer on the stand testified he could hear a "whimper."

And then he sneaked down and killed his own father, struggled with Rusty Jr., dragging him by both feet while bludgeoning him with his third hand.(this was depicted quite well on the BBC video) and then sneaked into Joe and Chrissy's room where another struggled took place.

Either Guy Heinze is a super ninja, or this was a well co-ordinated revenge attack by some drug group seeking to send a message to someone in that trailer. This was clearly not an angry son. This was a drug cartel send a message killing, well co-ordinated so as to not wake up anyone. As Mr. Knox said, it took 5 to 6 people to carry this out.

Caring, I only wish you could have been in the courtroom. You would see it differently.
wusatdatrial

Carrollton, GA

#1154 Apr 8, 2014
To answer missb, so police wore tyvek suits and no bootys, some wore bootys and no tyvek suits. Some wore no protective clothing at all.

Another mistake was that they did not change cloves when going from room to room. Mr. Know tesitfied that you should change gloves going from body to body, so as to not contaminated the next mini-crime scene. There was no evidence that this protocol was followed. In addition, Knox testified that after searching for survivors, no body should be moved until the area around it was processed. In this case, all the bodies were removed and then the scene was processed.

Why? For the same reason they did not want a blood spatter expert, a crime scene expert, GBI, FBI, Scotland yard to help. They had their man! No need to look further.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
want to buy 40 - 200 acres of land near darien May 9 retired 1
Beware. Apr 30 jbk 4
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Apr 24 kjackie 66
Jekyll Island Music Thread (Nov '14) Apr '18 Musikologist 6
Mr. Burch Apr '18 kywife17 1
Drug problem Mar '18 Nonya 1
anyone know tony klatt and his girlfriend Mary... (Mar '09) Feb '18 Judy 18

Brunswick Jobs

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages