I’ve watched a thousand of these and the opinion of investigators jump all over the map. No matter what or how someone responds or acts they find a way to justify guilt. Never speak to investigators. Get a lawyer. Even then they will say that’s a sign of guilt. No it’s not. It’s your constitutional right. I say all that to say this. I want everyone who is guilty to be convicted and punished.
I never understand why people seem to think not answering questions and hiring a lawyer point to guilt. Once you realize that law enforcement is focused on you as a suspect you'd be stupid to do anything else.
Well said - I agree with all that you have said. This was a gross miscarriage of justice. With police officers and a prosecution who lied to construct a case against an innocent man.
When the interviewer asked the DA if she would have chose Dr. Baden if he had agreed with the other medical examiners and she said, "Well, no" and laughed, that told me all I needed to know about her and those detectives! They were willing to put an innocent man away just to close a case. This angered me. They had no proof that this man did anything.
It’s lawyer humor. Prosecutorial strategy. Its funny to lawyers. Are we all without conscience? Maybe… but defense lawyers defend folks who they know are guilty, too. It goes both wats bc thats our justice system. Everyone is entitled to representation. I just wouldn’t jump the gun on her character. None of us know her personally. No DA would put an expert on the stand who disagrees with them, although the Defense could have.
That laugh from the DA, saying she would not have hired that forensic doctor had he not given her the answer she wanted, was so obvious . . . she could care less about who the real killer was, she just wanted to nail this case, get a feather in her career cap, and amplify her support from and connection with those investigating police officers. It was rather nauseating to watch . . .
This is probably the 1st time I’ve ever said, they’ve convicted the wrong person. There’s absolutely not enough evidence to say beyond a reasonable doubt he committed this crime, in fact there’s very little evidence to support the notion that he did.
It's not the first innocent person deemed guilty by a jury that I've seen, that's for sure. Juries just aren't taught to hold the prosecution to the extremely high standards they're meant to be held to.
Or you can except your lumps and bumps, and admit what you did, and throw yourself at the mercy of God and the court system, and you may just avoid doing life in prison, regardless what your sentence would be. I say this from personal experience
@samdoors5132 lol no. Absolutely get a lawyer. Innocent or guilty. Just relying on God is not enough. Relying on the court system?? Probably one of the biggest mistakes you could ever make. If you personally wouldn't get a lawyer, that's on you, but horrible advice to say otherwise
If there is evidence not even a lawyer will help you. They can give you a deal if you plead guilty and instead of the death penalty you'll get life in prison.
@@elizabethsolorio9837 True, but a victim's husband shouldn't go to prison solely based on statistics, and that's a lazy way of handling investigations. "Oh, you're the victim's husband/wife/significant other? Off to prison with you! Case closed!"
@@elizabethsolorio9837true.. but there’s usually some history of violence.. strange to me the lady said they wouldn’t have hired the Dr had he agreed with the ME
@@bullast2046 Thank you! Very strange comment coming from her! I think it was a bunch of new prosecutors looking to open a cold case, and because no one did their job right, they zeroed in on the only person they could! I hope he gets a new trial
@@touchofdumb Remember before the verdict, most of the jury were either going to say not guilty, or couldn’t decide. I believe it said only 3 said guilty to begin with. If they were having trouble, this obviously meant there was a lot of circumstantial
@@jillianpw9789 This case appears to be mostly circumstantial, if not all. But many cases are totally circumstantial and go to trial and are adjudicated. And most juries, start out divided, and then work together to come to a common verdict. That’s why sometimes they’re in there for days. If they all agreed right away, all verdicts would be instantaneous. Most cases don’t have a smoking gun.
I got released from a jury because I said I couldn't convict the defendent on the basis of one person's witness statement from 30 years ago and no evidence. The witness was the cop that arrived on the scene and he hadn't seen anything that had happened yet the prosecution used him as a witness. It's scary to think how easy it is to incarcerate someone even without witnesses and evidence. I can't convict someone based on feelings. "I feel like he did do it" should never be allowed as a verdict.
wow...very disturbing. i also wouldn't lend any more credibility to a cop's testimony than an ordinary citizen and, in some cases, would be more skeptical due to them having tunnel vision in far too many cases
@kurotsuki7427 yes sir. I was one of the jurors who got dismissed for the case. When asked if we would have an issue finding a conviction based on a single witness statement, I raised my hand. The prosecutor had my name jotted down and then proceeded to actually ask me why. I told him that I didn't feel comfortable passing judgment based on the statement of a single witness who in this case wasn't even pressed when the alleged crime took place. When it was time to select the jurors I got let go.
18:59 This prosecutor’s huge cheesy smile about hiring the medical examiner to fit their fake story based on bad police work is disgusting. Why is she cheesing like that?!? Smiling knowing she didn’t have a strong enough case because there was a chance he just didn’t do it…but oh well, let’s just get this case closed so this dude can go to prison and I can go home and chill. She’s so gross.
That medical examiner, Badan, is known for being paid to say whatever he is paid to. That absolutely highlights how these police had an agenda. There is no evidence. It's disturbing that they can decide you are the perpetrator and make it sound believable.
It's just ridiculous that he got charged because "there was no one else that could have done it" and that the prosecutor hired a man that agreed to say that she died at 3am. The only guy who put the TOD at an early enough time to agree with the story that they were trying to weave. Lack of any other DNA? Must be the husband. This was just bad police work
@@pinkpugginz There is no reason to think beyond a reasonable doubt he ineptly staged the burglary. Some other person might have staged the burglary too. Did they prove that there was no one else who might have killed her and also staged a burglary? "No evidence" isn't evidence.
That Rochester prosecutor is a disgusting piece of work - she is a shining example of everything that is wrong with our justice system. She blatantly and bold-faced admitted that she only hired her "expert witness" because he agreed with her agenda - not because his take on the evidence was more thorough then the previous experts analysis, which didn't happen to agree with what this monster DA wanted. Just absolutely gross, she should be arrested yet here she is bragging about her deeds on camera.
I do believe it was a staged burglary, and he may very well have been the murderer, but there is NO way I could have convicted him based on the evidence here! I cannot believe it was even allowed to go to trial! This poor family.
Seriously it seems they got tasked to find the murderer or else being fired and are just shooting for the husband with absolutely no valid evidence or proof.
@@proud2bnumber1 seriously, that's somebody's life, if there's not enough evidence to completely prove he did it. Just say not guilty till they get it. Otherwise you're risking sentencing an innocent person to life in prison. That's somebody's life in your hands.
IMO there's a BIG problem today with jurors who don't seem to understand the concept of reasonable doubt. There is SIGNIFICANT doubt about the time of death -- and it could well have occurred when the husband was away from home. That alone (given that there's not much evidence against him) is DEFINITE reasonable doubt.
Exactly. The only “evidence” they had was a time of death that could not be proven and a staged robbery, and that somehow points to the husband?? I honestly do not believe this.
That’s understandable since you (and I) were not at the trial. The jury was though. They made the decision. And with more evidence than we were presented here in this little show.
I think he killed her. Also its up to the jury. I have seen real stupid jury verdict, sometimes the killer goes free, other time they get it right. A lot to do with how defense lawyers present the case.
@@touchofdumbhow many times you going to reply on this video with that same comment? If there was more evidence I'm sure the "little TV show" would've presented it. What we missed at the trial was likely the intense amount of spin and narrative the prosecution laid on top of the very flimsy evidence.
@Amanda never speak to law enforcement even with your attorney present unless you can personally record the interview. If they won't allow you to do so, don't speak to them at all!
@@marshlightning No, especially if you are innocent. The Innocence Project has released over 3500 people wrongly imprisoned, tens of thousands to go...
I’m appalled by the verdict. Over zealous prosecutor + jurors who don’t understand “reasonable doubt” = determining this man’s fate. Absolutely disgusting.
The jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, , you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
The problem is you’re basing this opinion off a 45 minute episode… The jury members spent days hearing all the details. And deliberated. Maybe your opinion would’ve changed too
Yeap jail system pays these prosecutors to send innocent people to jail so they can make money of feds and state biggest mafia of our country jail system, pharmaceutical companies and politicians. Our justice system makes innocent people criminals.
Good Lord, that conviction is based on almost no evidence and entirely on the presumption that Jim must have done the crime because they can't tie anyone else to it. This is what happens when the egos of prosecutors and law enforcement get in the way of seeking the truth.
I cannot believe they convicted on this. How do you even bring it to trial with NO motive and no real evidence he did it? No proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That convict down the street saying he did it is enough reasonable doubt. Scary this can happen.
They want CONVICTIONS...not actual justice! 🚫⚖️ 🇺🇲 Be aware of prosecutors that claim they have a "tough on crime" 90-100% conviction rate!!! They aren't supposed to get it right every time!
But that serial rapist did not even know what the victim looked like. He said she had black hair when she has blonde and said she’s fat when she’s not. He was obviously lying just to gain notoriety.
Having served on three jury trials, you'd be amazed at how stupid/disinterested/easily manipulated jurors are. Also the US criminal justice system is about as watertight as a fishing net.
Whether he really did it or not, this is the first case I doubted the jury’s guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe he did do it but I don’t think there’s enough evidence to come to that conclusion.
I think exactly the same. Assuming that he's guilty because they cannot find any other clue pointing someone else, is not enough for me. Especially after 40 years.
Jurors convicted him because they believed the prosecutor when he said the crime scene was staged?? One juror even said, who else could have done it?? How in the world do they sleep at night for convicting this man. People are soooo easily influenced and lead like sheep and followers. I’m so blown away at the action of these jurors based on nothing but “words”
Blame the jurors you can see how people react when they’re scared. Of course they’ll put someone in prison. Did you see everybody running around in mass when we had a break out of the flu?
Wow!!! This story infuriated me! You have a DA admitting that it Baden’s time of death didn’t occur prior to the husband leaving, she would look for someone else to fit the narrative? The so called “detectives” saying that the aren’t experienced with homicide, yet they knew that the husband did it??? The shoes were never tested? And that his DNA was found on the axe? Why wouldn’t his DNA be found on the axe? He lived there and probably used the axe for chores around the house. If your inexperienced in investigating homicides, why didn’t they call in a professional agency? Why was the DA so close minded in finding a coroner’s earlier timeline? And how can Baden verify the TOD since he had no affiliation with the case? From reading reports? I have a lot of respect for Baden, however there’s clear evidence that he has a history of being a hired gun for many DA’s. Maybe her husband did it? Maybe he didn’t? In my opinion, there wasn’t enough clear cut evidence to support the findings. Tunnel vision? You bet!!
@cshaffer8283 very well put! And the part where the DA smugly grinned whilst admitting that she wouldn't have hired baden if his testimony didn't fit the timeline she wanted! How unprofessional!!
@@stevemarriott5649 Goes to show that prosecutors want CONVICTIONS... NOT actual Justice!!! This one makes me so angry because I know how pro-prosecution our "system" is!!! Most cold cases are brought to trial because there's definitive evidence, like DNA or a body found. What's the REAL reason why they wanted to try this old case if there's no new evidence?! Prosecutors can convince a jury of anything...if allowed to word everything properly. What defense does this man have all these decades later?!
I can’t understand why the investigation was so weak. Didn’t anyone ask Kodak about his manner and behaviour during the day if he supposedly went to work straight after murdering his wife? Why would he abandon his daughter at 3am until late at night and then bring her up in a loving environment for the rest of her life? It doesn’t make sense. While I’d like to blame Laraby the evidence is weak there too and shows how bad the initial investigation was.
" And that his DNA was found on the axe? Why wouldn’t his DNA be found on the axe? " Because 40 years ago there was no DNA tests and nobody even thought of collecting microscopic material for a test that didnt exist. The axe had a wood handle, not exactly any kind of ideal surface for fingerprints or DNA, and whatever sames and tests they DID do, didn't find foreign material on it from someone else. The axe looked old and even a bit rusty and like it had been outside in the rain, there was even tape or something on it put on no doubt because the user slipped when chopping wood or something and the handle hit badly splintering it's surface. The Husband's DNA or blood etc would have been on the axe anyway because it was HIS, but no one elses' material but his and his wife's was on it, no Ed Larabe material on it
So, the DA was honest about whom she used re time of death. All DAs and defense attorneys use witnesses who’ll help their case. I think he did it. I’m glad he was finally convicted, and I’m sorry he got to live free for decades.
The prosecutor got her pride in there. That smirk when she admitted that if the new examiner didn't give the opinion she wanted she wouldn't have hired him. Sickening.
Then you probably noticed the interviewers did a lousy job in this segment. Where were character witnesses? why did the father in law demonstrate malice against son in law. Why did he up and leave days after death? Did he move or just run? He clearly made a lot of money - did his lifestyle add up? They showed a shoe print, claimed no other dna found. What kind of woman was the wife? did she have enemies? Good lord they left out 99%,
But the jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
@@HobbyOrganist Oh, but she's a police officer that watched a 40 minute TV show on the case. She can "safely say they have no proof". Who are you to question such knowledge & expertise? LOL
The Prosecutor laughed and said that she picked an expert that would give her the opinion she wanted regarding time of death. Her law license shouold be removed immediately. This convictions should be thrown out with extreme prejudice. That is absolutely preposterous.
The arrogance of the investigators is stunning. I heard nothing that would give me confidence in his guilt. Their theory is he snapped one time in his life. Using an ax on your wife and mother of your child? That's a huge snap and they presented no evidence he's ever done anything of the sort. There's no other woman. There's no huge life insurance policy. He just snapped? Pretty scary how thin a case can take a person's life away.
Yep, the question is not even if he actually did it bc it's possible even if it seems unlikely, but they just had absolutely no evidence for convicting him.
So he snapped, did he. Out of the blue with no motive -- while she's SLEEPING -- he snaps. Pathetic -- I've come to believe that too often police and prosecutors are motivated by career advancement than by honest deliberation and assessment of the facts. The need the notch on their belts this case gives them to "COMPETE" with their peers. That female prosecutor makes my stomach turn. In essence, We chose Baden because he gave us the pretext we needed to indict! Badly done, woman, very badly done.
What's the alternative theory? Some guy breaks into the house in daylight, right when people are getting up for work, finds the axes owned by the family, strews valuables around without taking any, and then kills a sleeping woman for no reason, without assaulting her? Yeah, that makes sense - not.
He died in prison of esophageal cancer in May of 2023. He served 6 months of his 25 year sentence. I feel so sorry for his wife and daughter. ADD: Under state law, Krauseneck's indictment for the crime will now be dismissed because of a pending appeal. The logic is this: The appeal did not have an opportunity to be considered, so the indictment should be dismissed because of the possibility of a successful appeal.
@@thomasgentry6201 lol, this show didnt talk about the electric blanket used to slow down the time of death. nor the food still in her stomach., time of death played a major role in their decision
Oh my gosh, did not know that. This was a hard case, even though no one else fit the profile, it does not mean he is the only logical choice when we live in a world full of quiet dangerous murderers who may or may not leave a drop of evidence. I did not feel good about the decision. Hugs to you Sam, you have been through a lot, be kind to yourself love ❤❤
Did I hear this right? Did that prosecutor lady literally admit to the fact that they were just fishing for a medical examiner that would give them the time they wanted to hear? And that she wouldn’t have hired him if he had agreed with the previous medical examiners who all said the same thing? In other words, the implication is that she would keep looking until she got the answer she wanted. She says that on national television and this man is still in prison?
I could sleep at night knowing that I set guilty person free, but if I put 1 innocent person in jail I think I'd suffer for the rest of my life. I don't believe there was enough evidence in this case to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this man committed this crime. He could have, but it needs to be proven. I just don't see the proof.
I lived in Cuba until i was 14 years old. When I was in first grade, one of my classmates woke up one morning to kids playing outside her house. She went to her moms room telling her, "mom, you didn't wake me up for school". She listed her mom's mosquito net, and pulled the covers off of her mom. Her mom was dead, with a screwdriver through her skull. What an awful thing to happen to a little girl.
I have been watching this show for years and I am not even American. It literally helped me major in English language and Arts. Amazing representations of true stories, very good job ❤
It often highlights the corruption of the police and the prosecution. They are interested in winning, not in justice. I watch from a country where more inference is put on justice
That's why these stories about these horrible public "servants" are so infuriating. So three of them were just so excited to be on TV, they didn't care that they broke the law and would have lost the appeal. Honestly, it makes me wonder if someone situated him in his sleep so the appeal would stop. After what they did to conduct him, I wouldn't put it past them. Can't let the truth get in the way of their newfound fame.
Excellent teamwork and reporting 48 Hours! Thank you for your laudable Standards. It also helps alot to hear how suspects talk and interact in ordinary circumstances. There is so much to learn psychologicaly.
Jury stated they DID NOT base guilt on time of death. It was a 100% staged burglary by someone who doesn't know how to stage a burglary scene. I agree with is guilt. Only doubt I have is I did not hear in the video... what was the motive?
They could've just left him alone. They had nothing on him. Nothing. He spent the last of his time on Earth dealing with this and dying alone in prison, just so they can vacate his conviction AFTER HE DIES. These people make me sick.
They won’t be vacating his conviction. He did it. So you think cold cases shouldn’t be pursued if there’s new evidence or any other reason to open the case? Ridiculous.
@@Ceeradsactually you're 100% wrong. If a defendant dies during an appeal the conviction is vacated. He died during the appeal therefore the conviction was 100% vacated. Read a book. You shouldn't have got your Juris doctorate from a Happy Meal
How is hiring a lawyer always a sign of guilt? I believe I would absolutely hire a lawyer no matter how big or small something was if the COPs came knocking...
@@ilovebrandnewcarpets We don’t know what was omitted. Many reality TV shows use outrage to keep people interested. Not saying that’s what happened here but who knows? Many cases have been decided based on a big stack of circumstantial evidence that when all added up looks clear enough to a jury. Many cases have been solved without any smoking gun. There’s rarely a smoking gun. You gotta be there in time to see the gun before it quits smoking for one! 🙂
I agree. I don't think there was enough evidence. Too much time had passed. And the 'staged' crime scene looked like someone was in the middle of a burglary but got spooked and ran. That's why the garbage bag was left on the bedroom floor.
I found myself on the fence about his innocence or guilt but I was certain that he should have never went to trial. To many unknowns for a prosecution to proceed with the evidence it did as facts. I can understand why the daughter moved out of the country. This was America at it’s worst.
Well, there are certainly a lot of countries that are much worse on the corruption when it comes to the judicial system. But I would agree. Too much reasonable doubt, not enough evidence. Let God judge him if he did it.
These reporters did an an absolutely horrible job in this. Where was the character witnesses, work associates, friends, other family? Why did he run? Separate kid from mothers parents? If he ‘snapped’ why??!! I could go on, but you get the point.
Just wondering why, if it was a stranger, they made it look like a robbery but took nothing, leaving all the valuables behind. That bit just doesn't make sense to me!
Maybe it was exactly why they didn’t look at anyone else .. staged apparently automatically means it was the husband , maybe the killer had the same idea the cops did
We walked in on a burglar one day and all the music equipment cords were cut and the duffel bag was sitting on the floor, ready to put everything into it. But he heard us and ran out the back door. I don't think the scene was staged. I think he heard Kathy or the little girl and was interrupted!!
Well there wasn't no evidence. She was definitely killed in her sleep which would make the time window for someone else to have killed her very narrow. Staged crime scene and shoe print. Completely the wrong MO for the other guy. No foreign DNA. Still looks a bit thin, but you and I were not on the jury and did not hear all the evidence.
I think they had to blame someobody and they had nobody else so they pinned it on him, i'm not saying he didn't do it but his guilt def wasn't beyond a reasonable doubt!
@@dana2708 there are other cases that point to the husband when they cant find any outside DNA. It's not so unusual as far as that respect. And as far as that other guy, it was not his MO at all. First of all he would have been there with her husband there because of the time but most importantly, she wasnt raped and he wouldn't have put an axe through her head more than likely. I think you are correct, it was definitely the husband.
I think the fact they kept looking for someone to give them a time of death that gave them a case says it all! They knew they didn't have a case!I feel so bad for Sara. When she said she's now had both her parents taken from her, it's so unfair! I hope he is granted an appeal at least!
The fact that he lied about having a Ph.D to get his job at Kodak was very important. Wish they'd interviewed the two different women he "briefly" married after the killing. When they said it was obvious the 3-yr old baby had dressed herself it broke me.
A very close relative was (wrongly) convicted of having falsified a Covid document to be able to register his new residence. He hasn't murdered anyone yet.
When people say “he doesn’t look like a killer,” I always wonder “what does a killer look like?” It comes down to “bad genes” and bad hygiene, or simply a strange look in their eye. While I don’t recommend allowing strangers unrestricted access to your life, I also suggest we stop looking at strangers and judging them by their appearance.
Wow if you lose this case as a defense lawyer you should retire. Absolutely no concrete evidence. Scary there are people out there who think like this and could be jurors
I think I know how this man feels. When I moved into an apartment after 10 years living in a camper van, after about 3 months my next door accused me of making banging noises and waking him. I'm 67 years old and I absolutely do not make noise of any kind. They backed off the eviction but now I know how it feels. Its horrible.
It's funny and irritating at the same time ...to see prosecution and detectives saying " I have no doubt in my mind" when there is a clear REASONABLE DOUBT in this case
Didn’t we all just watch a little TV show? Were any of us at the trial? Rushing to judgment rampant on this board. Remember, many TV shows are crafted to infuriate the audience. That’s why the most annoying contestant on reality show stays till the last episode.
@@touchofdumb here is what i found , an electric blanket was used to throw off time of death, also food was undigested in her stomach she was murdered that night not morning , bingo now we know why the jury swung that way , the yt detectives here think they know it all.
@@touchofdumbTrue, but there was no established motive and the prosecution decided to go after the guy after over 40 years as a last chance ditch effort.
“Some people may say that we were looking for an opinion..” “Somebody who would pick a time of death that was before he left the house in order to secure an indictment” “Absolutely” “But if in fact, Dr had agreed with the other medical examiners, would you have hired him?” “Absolutely not” 😄😄 Her smile after saying that was ridiculous
@@markprange4386 It’s common practice. NO attorney would put an expert on the stand whose testimony contradicts their case. The only way it’d be misconduct is if they paid them to say what they wanted them to say or they knowingly used an unqualified person’s opinion.
His current house looked very luxury. Who knows he got her life insurance. He obviously worked a way up to build up his wealth. He also found a woman who loves him unconditionally #4 wife.
Her admission to the time of death expert says it all. She cares not for justice. She and the detectives just want to pin it on someone. Disgusting individuals.
That's our "justice" system - it has nothing to do with justice or solving a crime. It has everything to do with winning or losing in court, period. As you saw here, they will do anything to win, regardless of justice.
A 3½ year old girl left alone all day will definitely play with all the things she would otherwise not be allowed to! A silver tea set, Mommy's purse! Looked like she was having a tea party on the floor.
It’s hard to tell for sure without being able to look closely at all the of the pictures of the house-but the “staged burglary” stuff like the tea set being out and the purse being spilled out could very well have been the daughter. She was there all day by herself. That seems like exactly what my daughter would have done at 3 years old if she’d been left home alone…get into all the shiny things she wasn’t allowed to touch.
I didn't even think of that but yes! I have a 4 year old and I can totally see this happening. The only thing that defies that is the adult shoe print on the garbage bag - but maybe Sara put the shoe on there and moved it? All in all just too many doubts and unknowns. He should have never been found guilty.
The jurors and others said, "The forensics did not point to anybody else," but neglected to acknowledge the evidence didn't directly point to James, either. A lack of evidence pointing towards someone else doesn't make another person guilty. That's not how it works.
Either there was evidence that 48hrs didn’t share from the trial or the jury heard something else…but what was the motive? Was there an affair or insurance payout? We’re they having trouble? People don’t just do things like this with no motive. I saw an enormous amount of reasonable doubt.
'If' he did do it, letting him remain free for 40 years, is basically letting him get away with it. Sentenced to prison at the very end of your life, is no justice, no punishment.
“Scary if you did it.” Scary no matter what! If police accused me of killing someone, I’d be terrified. I know I’m innocent, but if they are accusing me, they probably have evidence or reasons that make me look guilty.
That's my question too. Even though prosecutors don't need motive I suppose the jury need one in order to send an old man at his age to life in prison.
The jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, , you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
@@HobbyOrganist I don’t know. How could their expert witnesses make a determination about her time of death 40 years after the fact?? I don’t think they would have had a case without that testimony and the fact they “shopped” for an expert to give them the results they wanted, while discarding other pathologists opinions, speaks volumes.
The boat shoe print on the garbage bag is very telling. He owned a pair of them. What burglar commits his crimes wearing boat shoes? Also, she most likely wouldn't have still been asleep at 6:30 when he says he left. She would've been waking up to take care of her young daughter. He did it in the wee morning hours while she was sound asleep.
I would have never thought he was guilty! The whole thing is hazy. I don't think he would have left that little girl, his daughter, by herself for so long with her dead mother. That is not something a loving father would do. So sad for all. 😢
I also think if someone is that deranged to do something so horrible to the mother , they would have no issues hurting the little girl as well, its odd that they didn't.
Is it POSSIBLE that Sarah, as a little girl left unattended for hours, could have taken that silver set out of the bag? It looks like it was set up for a tea party.
Exactly my thoughts. And did they check if she had eaten at all that day, etc. Obviously she's still a baby but with the proper counselors she could have provided some real insight.
As a African American man I tried to do everything I can to stay out and away from trouble because if they could convict an old man with a 40 year old case and absolutely no evidence at all what would they do to me.
Unbelievable. A jury of your peers is the scariest thing. I hope they all realize that a life of a person is not a guessing or opinionated game and that they could have the same thing happen to them. How often do we see people wrongfully convicted over circumstantial evidence. Way to fail.
In law school one of my professors told us that if you did it, get a jury (because you’ll have some chance of getting off), but if you didn’t do it, get a judge. He said a judge will be able to weed through the evidence and understands the burden of proof whereas the jury will go by their feelings and their misunderstanding of the law. A jury might also convict you simply because you’re the one sitting in that seat and “why would they charge him if he didn’t do it?” 🤦♀️ Good luck trying to explain the “presumption of innocence” to newly minted US citizens who didn’t grow up with that standard.
Seems like the prosecutor and cops were dead set on him. It's a shame they care so little about putting what could very well be an innocent father and husband in prison. There wasn't enough evidence. I'm really surprised how this turned out.
Lying to get a better job & murdering someone are two very different things, & he was in the program for a PhD he didn’t finish … so maybe he put it when he was planning to finish & then when he didn’t finish he wasn’t gonna tell anyone that , doesn’t make him a murderer .
I considered this as well. Her family was saying he was keeping her and their daughter away from them. Narcissists lie, they have a mask, and they isolate so they can control the victims. He was able to portray "nice guy" facade, that is why his current wife is so on his side. I think he did it.
you may ask "what kind of person would leave their own 3 year old child alone with a deceased person all day long"? And I would say the kind of person who would off their own wife and the mother of their child would do something like that.
Children tell the truth at that age. She would have said it was her 'daddy' if she saw her father but she said she saw a man. What is so hard about believing the truth. I hope you are never on a jury.
The daughter supported her father. I am just in a lot of pain today and I hate injustices. This man died waiting for his appeal and his daughter lost him to a brutal prison system on concocted evidence of a corrupt system. The judge should have stopped the trial at its early stages for lack of evidence. The worst client to have in America is an innocent one because the whole system is geared towards convicting people, innocent or guilty. America is known in the Western world for having an inadequate justice system. This was just another case of its gross failure. I'm glad I don't live in America. Americans are programmed to say...we have the best - when they don't.. America is far from the best place to live in the world and suffers from corruption. The best place to live is in Sweden. America is ranked number four but I think that is a gross exaggeration. Plus, the child saw a man - she did not mention her father or mother. Children don't lie in these situations but the police and the prosecution lied through their teeth.. @@mm5929
You don't know that you are guessing. The police are worse they are corrupt. The American justice system is corrupt. Tell me how you know that is what she meant. Children are honest about those things and they know their parents by sight - you are plain wrong.@@betty0672
I'm not convinced that the husband did it. Honestly, there's nothing in this case that makes me suspect the husband, either. It's one of those cases I think the police just really want it to be him. Not saying he couldn't have done it, but not a single thing proves his guilt.
Why is her family so convinced it was the husband? Only the couple’s daughter believes he’s not guilty. I just don’t get why Cathy’s dad and cousin blame him so vehemently. I’m full of doubts about the fake crime scene. No rape and no burglary. What was the motive then?
Because the serial rapist and killer had already died in 2014 and the family had no one to blame so there’s the end or closure of the cold case before Cathy’s father dies.
She doesn't think he did it because he's raised her to believe he didn't do it. Kathy's father didn't think he did it until many many years later. Maybe they wouldn't have turned on him if he didn't keep Kathy's daughter from them intentionally.
Click here to watch more full episodes of "48 Hours": ua-cam.com/play/PLcFHkKbd_jTJiRmfUfLX2Ay_hnf5j3cxH.html
Thank you for that! Just knowing that lift the burden. I will let you know
The axe that was outside ..if it was for the k family who took it outside?
@@lynnewilson5923😅😅 im oki
No
@@lynnewilson5923😊😊😊
“It’s only scary if you did it” absolutely disagree! It’s scary if you’re wrongly accused too! These cops are too much 🙄
I’ve watched a thousand of these and the opinion of investigators jump all over the map. No matter what or how someone responds or acts they find a way to justify guilt. Never speak to investigators. Get a lawyer. Even then they will say that’s a sign of guilt. No it’s not. It’s your constitutional right. I say all that to say this. I want everyone who is guilty to be convicted and punished.
😮
8:00
Came here to say this, typical boys in blue being incompetent to get a pay raise and play with others freedom.
Yep, my thoughts exactly 💯
I never understand why people seem to think not answering questions and hiring a lawyer point to guilt. Once you realize that law enforcement is focused on you as a suspect you'd be stupid to do anything else.
I would never speak to law enforcement without a attorney.
Exactly. I wouldn't even say hello to the police without an attorney present.
Well said - I agree with all that you have said. This was a gross miscarriage of justice. With police officers and a prosecution who lied to construct a case against an innocent man.
Agreed
Cops and prosecutors tell their family members if ever there are arrested talk to a lawyer and don't talk to the police.
When the interviewer asked the DA if she would have chose Dr. Baden if he had agreed with the other medical examiners and she said, "Well, no" and laughed, that told me all I needed to know about her and those detectives! They were willing to put an innocent man away just to close a case. This angered me. They had no proof that this man did anything.
It’s lawyer humor. Prosecutorial strategy. Its funny to lawyers. Are we all without conscience? Maybe… but defense lawyers defend folks who they know are guilty, too. It goes both wats bc thats our justice system. Everyone is entitled to representation. I just wouldn’t jump the gun on her character. None of us know her personally. No DA would put an expert on the stand who disagrees with them, although the Defense could have.
I agree. Sadly, many innocent people are sent to prison. But, they closed the case. 😢
I think he's innocent
I think the 3 year old daughter did it…
That laugh from the DA, saying she would not have hired that forensic doctor had he not given her the answer she wanted, was so obvious . . . she could care less about who the real killer was, she just wanted to nail this case, get a feather in her career cap, and amplify her support from and connection with those investigating police officers. It was rather nauseating to watch . . .
This is probably the 1st time I’ve ever said, they’ve convicted the wrong person. There’s absolutely not enough evidence to say beyond a reasonable doubt he committed this crime, in fact there’s very little evidence to support the notion that he did.
I’m honestly shocked that the jury came back guilty that quickly. I think the police work in this case was trash from the start
True there's little evidence but on circumstances alone, he is the probable murderer. No one else could have done it!
It's not the first innocent person deemed guilty by a jury that I've seen, that's for sure. Juries just aren't taught to hold the prosecution to the extremely high standards they're meant to be held to.
lol?
@sandra…
You don’t put people in prison for life for that….
Who most likely did it..? Really?
Those two detectives, smiling and chuckling through this whole thing, like it's funny? They give me the creeps.
Exactly. It makes you wonder how many innocent people were convicted over the years, because of these two masterminds.
It's a game to those tools. They are dangerous
They seem like the feed off of other people's misery. They seem very twisted and very angry.
Too many dire cops 👮♂ out there. Oh, it's only another woman . . . hahaha!
@@perrieargent9997 wtf does that mean? Be specific.
Remember kids! If you're guilty, you need a lawyer. If you're innocent, you REALLY need a lawyer.
Or you can except your lumps and bumps, and admit what you did, and throw yourself at the mercy of God and the court system, and you may just avoid doing life in prison, regardless what your sentence would be.
I say this from personal experience
truth
@samdoors5132 lol no. Absolutely get a lawyer. Innocent or guilty. Just relying on God is not enough. Relying on the court system?? Probably one of the biggest mistakes you could ever make. If you personally wouldn't get a lawyer, that's on you, but horrible advice to say otherwise
If there is evidence not even a lawyer will help you. They can give you a deal if you plead guilty and instead of the death penalty you'll get life in prison.
100% agree with your statement!!!!
There's not enough evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Being someone's spouse doesn't automatically make you a killer.
But it does make them suspicious. Most murders are done by someone close to the victim
i agreed there’s no proof but jury decided he is guilty anyway omg
@@elizabethsolorio9837 True, but a victim's husband shouldn't go to prison solely based on statistics, and that's a lazy way of handling investigations.
"Oh, you're the victim's husband/wife/significant other? Off to prison with you! Case closed!"
@@elizabethsolorio9837true.. but there’s usually some history of violence.. strange to me the lady said they wouldn’t have hired the Dr had he agreed with the ME
@@bullast2046
Thank you! Very strange comment coming from her! I think it was a bunch of new prosecutors looking to open a cold case, and because no one did their job right, they zeroed in on the only person they could! I hope he gets a new trial
There is not enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The only evidence they have is literally that he is her husband which is ridiculous.
We all watched a little television show. Not the trial. The jury was at the trial unlike us.
@@touchofdumb
Remember before the verdict, most of the jury were either going to say not guilty, or couldn’t decide. I believe it said only 3 said guilty to begin with. If they were having trouble, this obviously meant there was a lot of circumstantial
@@touchofdumbokay so you’re just making the same comment over and over, got it.
@@ilovebrandnewcarpets Too different people who are saying the same thing over and over. I’m free to do that buddy.
@@jillianpw9789 This case appears to be mostly circumstantial, if not all. But many cases are totally circumstantial and go to trial and are adjudicated.
And most juries, start out divided, and then work together to come to a common verdict. That’s why sometimes they’re in there for days. If they all agreed right away, all verdicts would be instantaneous.
Most cases don’t have a smoking gun.
I got released from a jury because I said I couldn't convict the defendent on the basis of one person's witness statement from 30 years ago and no evidence. The witness was the cop that arrived on the scene and he hadn't seen anything that had happened yet the prosecution used him as a witness. It's scary to think how easy it is to incarcerate someone even without witnesses and evidence. I can't convict someone based on feelings. "I feel like he did do it" should never be allowed as a verdict.
wow...very disturbing. i also wouldn't lend any more credibility to a cop's testimony than an ordinary citizen and, in some cases, would be more skeptical due to them having tunnel vision in far too many cases
thanks for your integrity...
Well put. Way to stick to your principles
You said "no i dont agree" and they dismissed you?
@kurotsuki7427 yes sir. I was one of the jurors who got dismissed for the case. When asked if we would have an issue finding a conviction based on a single witness statement, I raised my hand. The prosecutor had my name jotted down and then proceeded to actually ask me why. I told him that I didn't feel comfortable passing judgment based on the statement of a single witness who in this case wasn't even pressed when the alleged crime took place. When it was time to select the jurors I got let go.
18:59 This prosecutor’s huge cheesy smile about hiring the medical examiner to fit their fake story based on bad police work is disgusting. Why is she cheesing like that?!? Smiling knowing she didn’t have a strong enough case because there was a chance he just didn’t do it…but oh well, let’s just get this case closed so this dude can go to prison and I can go home and chill. She’s so gross.
That medical examiner, Badan, is known for being paid to say whatever he is paid to. That absolutely highlights how these police had an agenda. There is no evidence. It's disturbing that they can decide you are the perpetrator and make it sound believable.
I agree 1000%!!!
That's what the arrest warrant was based on and the jury didn't even consider it he deserves a new trial
I’d love to know how much they paid their expert witness and how he could make a TOD so long after her death.
100% agree!
It's just ridiculous that he got charged because "there was no one else that could have done it" and that the prosecutor hired a man that agreed to say that she died at 3am. The only guy who put the TOD at an early enough time to agree with the story that they were trying to weave. Lack of any other DNA? Must be the husband. This was just bad police work
he staged a burglary and was there at the time of death. the body was decomposed and in rigor. he's guilty.
Baden also testified that JFK was shot in the back of his head, not from the front!😳
And nobody's talking about a possible insurance angle, which is often a big motivater..
I say: “flip a coin?” Heads he did it, tails…flip again and again until you get heads.
@@pinkpugginz There is no reason to think beyond a reasonable doubt he ineptly staged the burglary. Some other person might have staged the burglary too. Did they prove that there was no one else who might have killed her and also staged a burglary? "No evidence" isn't evidence.
That Rochester prosecutor is a disgusting piece of work - she is a shining example of everything that is wrong with our justice system. She blatantly and bold-faced admitted that she only hired her "expert witness" because he agreed with her agenda - not because his take on the evidence was more thorough then the previous experts analysis, which didn't happen to agree with what this monster DA wanted. Just absolutely gross, she should be arrested yet here she is bragging about her deeds on camera.
She also has a DEXTER DOLL on her bookshelf. That tells you everything you need to know about her character.
She is in the news again displaying a toxic personality.
For real she is disquasting person.
The jury put him away not the system
@@rainaeasley7863 the jury is a big PART of the system
I do believe it was a staged burglary, and he may very well have been the murderer, but there is NO way I could have convicted him based on the evidence here! I cannot believe it was even allowed to go to trial! This poor family.
Yeah, I'm shocked this even made it past the Prosecutor's desk. There's literally zero evidence!
Or the Murderer staged the burglary to frame anyone but themselves.. Why would he have on boat shoes at 3am if thats when she was killed?
Circumstantial.
?
Of course, we are not going to see and know every thing about this case by this little program.
This prosecution was ridiculous. That prosecutor and the two detectives should be embarrassed.
Seriously it seems they got tasked to find the murderer or else being fired and are just shooting for the husband with absolutely no valid evidence or proof.
But also the jury!
You’re the one that should be embarrassed with that comment.🙄
@@proud2bnumber1 seriously, that's somebody's life, if there's not enough evidence to completely prove he did it. Just say not guilty till they get it. Otherwise you're risking sentencing an innocent person to life in prison. That's somebody's life in your hands.
He probably did it, but there was barely enough evidence to go visit his house.
IMO there's a BIG problem today with jurors who don't seem to understand the concept of reasonable doubt. There is SIGNIFICANT doubt about the time of death -- and it could well have occurred when the husband was away from home. That alone (given that there's not much evidence against him) is DEFINITE reasonable doubt.
Exactly. The only “evidence” they had was a time of death that could not be proven and a staged robbery, and that somehow points to the husband?? I honestly do not believe this.
Agreed - if you can't say every box is checked that someone is guilty, then there is reasonable doubt.
I'm not saying he didn't do it but I'd have a real hard time finding him guilty without reasonable doubt
That’s understandable since you (and I) were not at the trial. The jury was though. They made the decision.
And with more evidence than we were presented here in this little show.
same, just not enough
@@touchofdumbThey didn't have any evidence. Why do you think it took over 40 years? It was a last chance ditch effort.
I think he killed her. Also its up to the jury. I have seen real stupid jury verdict, sometimes the killer goes free, other time they get it right. A lot to do with how defense lawyers present the case.
That’s cause you have a brain unlike the jurors
Did the jury ever hear of reasonable doubt? The prosecutors even admitted to shopping for a narrative that fit . Disgusting
We weren’t at the trial. We just watched a little tv show.
@@touchofdumb and?
@@craigime And you and I don’t have the whole story.
@@touchofdumb neither does the prosecution... and?
@@touchofdumbhow many times you going to reply on this video with that same comment? If there was more evidence I'm sure the "little TV show" would've presented it. What we missed at the trial was likely the intense amount of spin and narrative the prosecution laid on top of the very flimsy evidence.
NEVER SPEAK TO LAW ENFORCEMENT WITHOUT A LAWYER.
@Amanda never speak to law enforcement even with your attorney present unless you can personally record the interview. If they won't allow you to do so, don't speak to them at all!
Especially when you are guilty.
@@marshlightning No, especially if you are innocent. The Innocence Project has released over 3500 people wrongly imprisoned, tens of thousands to go...
@@ritamengucci1932SOLID ADVICE 💯
"Law enforcement "....
I’m appalled by the verdict. Over zealous prosecutor + jurors who don’t understand “reasonable doubt” = determining this man’s fate. Absolutely disgusting.
Jury should be prosecuted for incompetance!
id have a hard tiime voting guilty but the avg juror is a peanut head , god help us all
The jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, , you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
Bull overzealous prosecutor and incompetent investigators!@@HobbyOrganist
@@HobbyOrganistI hope you don’t have kids, because you’d blame them for things they never did and would probably give them up for adoption at age 10
This is one case where guilt wasn't proven beyond all reasonable doubt. The justice system is a disgrace.
I disagree
I agree.
Saying it’s a staged robbery is literally just cops opinion. The boat shoe thing is also absurd
Agreed. This jury's verdict is absurd. This is one case where I truly believe the person is wrongly convicted.
The problem is you’re basing this opinion off a 45 minute episode… The jury members spent days hearing all the details. And deliberated.
Maybe your opinion would’ve changed too
This is the kind of case that makes me continue to question the justice system.
Inconsistent as hell, sometimes it's wonderful, sometimes it's atrocious. But unfortunately it's this way in every country.
It is filled with scumbags who can't say we were wrong, we are sorry
We apologize
Yeap jail system pays these prosecutors to send innocent people to jail so they can make money of feds and state biggest mafia of our country jail system, pharmaceutical companies and politicians. Our justice system makes innocent people criminals.
Good Lord, that conviction is based on almost no evidence and entirely on the presumption that Jim must have done the crime because they can't tie anyone else to it. This is what happens when the egos of prosecutors and law enforcement get in the way of seeking the truth.
I cannot believe they convicted on this. How do you even bring it to trial with NO motive and no real evidence he did it? No proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That convict down the street saying he did it is enough reasonable doubt. Scary this can happen.
They want CONVICTIONS...not actual justice! 🚫⚖️ 🇺🇲
Be aware of prosecutors that claim they have a "tough on crime" 90-100% conviction rate!!!
They aren't supposed to get it right every time!
But that serial rapist did not even know what the victim looked like. He said she had black hair when she has blonde and said she’s fat when she’s not. He was obviously lying just to gain notoriety.
Having served on three jury trials, you'd be amazed at how stupid/disinterested/easily manipulated jurors are. Also the US criminal justice system is about as watertight as a fishing net.
Exactly!!!
@@tear_tea I mean her hair looked dark to me in the photo… he said dark, the host said blonde, they showed her, I saw dark hair…
I can't get the image of that poor little three and a half year old home alone all day with her mummy's dead body. That's an unspeakable evil.
I absolutely love how Erin relays the stories. She's a wonderful narrator and keeps you wanting to watch!
To the contrary
Keith Morrison enters the chat
Whether he really did it or not, this is the first case I doubted the jury’s guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe he did do it but I don’t think there’s enough evidence to come to that conclusion.
maybe there was something else the show didnt touch on
I think exactly the same. Assuming that he's guilty because they cannot find any other clue pointing someone else, is not enough for me. Especially after 40 years.
You are not the jury . They decided he was guilty for a reason. What you believe it’s not relevant. Just you opinion.
@@mariapilarmeNot all juries are made up of intelligent people. 🙄
@@mariapilarme And you think jurries never get it wrong?
I’m shocked that he was found guilty!! Wow.
Jurors convicted him because they believed the prosecutor when he said the crime scene was staged?? One juror even said, who else could have done it??
How in the world do they sleep at night for convicting this man. People are soooo easily influenced and lead like sheep and followers. I’m so blown away at the action of these jurors based on nothing but “words”
I don't get how not a single person could hold out. I don't care if I hang a jury, I refuse to send someone to prison if it wasn't proven!
What a bunch of clown jurors
Blame the jurors you can see how people react when they’re scared. Of course they’ll put someone in prison. Did you see everybody running around in mass when we had a break out of the flu?
Wow!!! This story infuriated me! You have a DA admitting that it Baden’s time of death didn’t occur prior to the husband leaving, she would look for someone else to fit the narrative? The so called “detectives” saying that the aren’t experienced with homicide, yet they knew that the husband did it??? The shoes were never tested? And that his DNA was found on the axe? Why wouldn’t his DNA be found on the axe? He lived there and probably used the axe for chores around the house. If your inexperienced in investigating homicides, why didn’t they call in a professional agency? Why was the DA so close minded in finding a coroner’s earlier timeline? And how can Baden verify the TOD since he had no affiliation with the case? From reading reports? I have a lot of respect for Baden, however there’s clear evidence that he has a history of being a hired gun for many DA’s. Maybe her husband did it? Maybe he didn’t? In my opinion, there wasn’t enough clear cut evidence to support the findings. Tunnel vision? You bet!!
@cshaffer8283 very well put! And the part where the DA smugly grinned whilst admitting that she wouldn't have hired baden if his testimony didn't fit the timeline she wanted! How unprofessional!!
@@stevemarriott5649
Goes to show that prosecutors want CONVICTIONS...
NOT actual Justice!!!
This one makes me so angry because I know how pro-prosecution our "system" is!!!
Most cold cases are brought to trial because there's definitive evidence, like DNA or a body found.
What's the REAL reason why they wanted to try this old case if there's no new evidence?!
Prosecutors can convince a jury of anything...if allowed to word everything properly.
What defense does this man have all these decades later?!
I can’t understand why the investigation was so weak. Didn’t anyone ask Kodak about his manner and behaviour during the day if he supposedly went to work straight after murdering his wife? Why would he abandon his daughter at 3am until late at night and then bring her up in a loving environment for the rest of her life? It doesn’t make sense. While I’d like to blame Laraby the evidence is weak there too and shows how bad the initial investigation was.
" And that his DNA was found on the axe? Why wouldn’t his DNA be found on the axe? "
Because 40 years ago there was no DNA tests and nobody even thought of collecting microscopic material for a test that didnt exist.
The axe had a wood handle, not exactly any kind of ideal surface for fingerprints or DNA, and whatever sames and tests they DID do, didn't find foreign material on it from someone else. The axe looked old and even a bit rusty and like it had been outside in the rain, there was even tape or something on it put on no doubt because the user slipped when chopping wood or something and the handle hit badly splintering it's surface.
The Husband's DNA or blood etc would have been on the axe anyway because it was HIS, but no one elses' material but his and his wife's was on it, no Ed Larabe material on it
So, the DA was honest about whom she used re time of death. All DAs and defense attorneys use witnesses who’ll help their case.
I think he did it. I’m glad he was finally convicted, and I’m sorry he got to live free for decades.
The prosecutor got her pride in there. That smirk when she admitted that if the new examiner didn't give the opinion she wanted she wouldn't have hired him. Sickening.
I am a Police Officer and can safely say, They have NO proof what so ever that he committed this crime.....
Then you probably noticed the interviewers did a lousy job in this segment. Where were character witnesses? why did the father in law demonstrate malice against son in law. Why did he up and leave days after death? Did he move or just run? He clearly made a lot of money - did his lifestyle add up? They showed a shoe print, claimed no other dna found. What kind of woman was the wife? did she have enemies? Good lord they left out 99%,
But the jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
Police officers are not attorneys. I'll pass on your "expert" opinion on the law and the facts of this case. Thanks.
@@HobbyOrganist Oh, but she's a police officer that watched a 40 minute TV show on the case. She can "safely say they have no proof". Who are you to question such knowledge & expertise? LOL
@@kensmith2796
Problem is, all the “facts” of this case were manufactured by the prosecution. Zero proof he did it.
The Prosecutor laughed and said that she picked an expert that would give her the opinion she wanted regarding time of death. Her law license shouold be removed immediately. This convictions should be thrown out with extreme prejudice. That is absolutely preposterous.
Don’t think there was enough evidence but him not caring about her being murdered or seeking the real murderer put a target on his back.
The arrogance of the investigators is stunning. I heard nothing that would give me confidence in his guilt.
Their theory is he snapped one time in his life. Using an ax on your wife and mother of your child? That's a huge snap and they presented no evidence he's ever done anything of the sort. There's no other woman. There's no huge life insurance policy. He just snapped? Pretty scary how thin a case can take a person's life away.
Yep, the question is not even if he actually did it bc it's possible even if it seems unlikely, but they just had absolutely no evidence for convicting him.
So he snapped, did he. Out of the blue with no motive -- while she's SLEEPING -- he snaps. Pathetic -- I've come to believe that too often police and prosecutors are motivated by career advancement than by honest deliberation and assessment of the facts. The need the notch on their belts this case gives them to "COMPETE" with their peers. That female prosecutor makes my stomach turn. In essence, We chose Baden because he gave us the pretext we needed to indict! Badly done, woman, very badly done.
What's the alternative theory? Some guy breaks into the house in daylight, right when people are getting up for work, finds the axes owned by the family, strews valuables around without taking any, and then kills a sleeping woman for no reason, without assaulting her? Yeah, that makes sense - not.
He died in prison of esophageal cancer in May of 2023. He served 6 months of his 25 year sentence. I feel so sorry for his wife and daughter. ADD: Under state law, Krauseneck's indictment for the crime will now be dismissed because of a pending appeal. The logic is this: The appeal did not have an opportunity to be considered, so the indictment should be dismissed because of the possibility of a successful appeal.
Anyone on the Jury should be prosecuted for being incompetent and the witch DA had a axe to grind!!
It was all badly done 😢 so sad for his wife and daughter
@@thomasgentry6201 lol, this show didnt talk about the electric blanket used to slow down the time of death. nor the food still in her stomach., time of death played a major role in their decision
Oh my gosh, did not know that. This was a hard case, even though no one else fit the profile, it does not mean he is the only logical choice when we live in a world full of quiet dangerous murderers who may or may not leave a drop of evidence.
I did not feel good about the decision.
Hugs to you Sam, you have been through a lot, be kind to yourself love ❤❤
No way😮
Did I hear this right? Did that prosecutor lady literally admit to the fact that they were just fishing for a medical examiner that would give them the time they wanted to hear? And that she wouldn’t have hired him if he had agreed with the previous medical examiners who all said the same thing? In other words, the implication is that she would keep looking until she got the answer she wanted. She says that on national television and this man is still in prison?
There was such tunnel vision with this case. It makes me mad for the family that they couldn’t see past him and find the actual killer 🙄😡
I could sleep at night knowing that I set guilty person free, but if I put 1 innocent person in jail I think I'd suffer for the rest of my life. I don't believe there was enough evidence in this case to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this man committed this crime. He could have, but it needs to be proven. I just don't see the proof.
one innocent person in prison is already too much,
That's because you're a good person who cares about justice, not a horrible person who just wanted more fame.
That’s cause you’re a smart and good hearted person. Most ppl in America are not
I lived in Cuba until i was 14 years old. When I was in first grade, one of my classmates woke up one morning to kids playing outside her house. She went to her moms room telling her, "mom, you didn't wake me up for school". She listed her mom's mosquito net, and pulled the covers off of her mom. Her mom was dead, with a screwdriver through her skull. What an awful thing to happen to a little girl.
I have been watching this show for years and I am not even American. It literally helped me major in English language and Arts. Amazing representations of true stories, very good job ❤
It often highlights the corruption of the police and the prosecution. They are interested in winning, not in justice. I watch from a country where more inference is put on justice
english arts? you mean murdering?
How many people are in prison unjustly right now? I think we would be shocked by the truth
That's why these stories about these horrible public "servants" are so infuriating. So three of them were just so excited to be on TV, they didn't care that they broke the law and would have lost the appeal. Honestly, it makes me wonder if someone situated him in his sleep so the appeal would stop. After what they did to conduct him, I wouldn't put it past them. Can't let the truth get in the way of their newfound fame.
4% of all inmate population, are INNOCENT.
4%.
And how many murderers still haven’t been caught? You know how many murders remain unsolved? It works both ways.
Have you seen the Pete Coones episode ‘The Phone Call’? It’s funny how these erroneous cops never sit for an interview.
Excellent teamwork and reporting 48 Hours! Thank you for your laudable Standards. It also helps alot to hear how suspects talk and interact in ordinary circumstances. There is so much to learn psychologicaly.
Are we really to believe, that someone is able to determine an almost exact time of death, some FORTY years after the person has died?
No we can't and shocked they filed charges with so little evidence
She admitted the only reason she hired him was because he gave that time. That should not be allowed as evidence.
Jury stated they DID NOT base guilt on time of death. It was a 100% staged burglary by someone who doesn't know how to stage a burglary scene. I agree with is guilt. Only doubt I have is I did not hear in the video... what was the motive?
@trekmanone1676 They say they didn't, but even the prosecutor admitted that without that change in time of death, they didn't have a case.
Exactly!
They could've just left him alone. They had nothing on him. Nothing. He spent the last of his time on Earth dealing with this and dying alone in prison, just so they can vacate his conviction AFTER HE DIES. These people make me sick.
They won’t be vacating his conviction. He did it. So you think cold cases shouldn’t be pursued if there’s new evidence or any other reason to open the case? Ridiculous.
@@Ceeradsactually you're 100% wrong. If a defendant dies during an appeal the conviction is vacated. He died during the appeal therefore the conviction was 100% vacated. Read a book. You shouldn't have got your Juris doctorate from a Happy Meal
@@rachelsill79 I read many books. I’m wrong here, but you need not have tried to insult me. 🤮
He didn’t get anything vacated. He killed that woman
I hate when police and DA's say "no doubt in my mind" when there is only barely any evidence.
To openly insinuate you would change your expert witness until you got the answers you need is just beyond belief.
Smirking while she said it too
@@buschovski1Smirking? Flat out grinning and proud of it. I've never wanted to wish karma was real more than after watching this video.
I’m assuming prosecutors and defense attorneys _all_ do that.
She openly admits it, then GRINS.
They had a second opinion from an expert which completely disagreed. Your argument is baseless
Always get a lawyer. Honestly, especially if you’re innocent. Don’t let the system end up screwing you over!
How is hiring a lawyer always a sign of guilt? I believe I would absolutely hire a lawyer no matter how big or small something was if the COPs came knocking...
Unbelievable. It’s just hard to believe a jury can presume he was guilty.
Why is it hard to believe? We weren’t there. We all watched a little tv show.
@@touchofdumbbecause they have nothing to prove he did it.
@@touchofdumbhonest question, do you think the tv show omitted some kind of smoking gun?
@@ilovebrandnewcarpets We don’t know what was omitted.
Many reality TV shows use outrage to keep people interested. Not saying that’s what happened here but who knows?
Many cases have been decided based on a big stack of circumstantial evidence that when all added up looks clear enough to a jury.
Many cases have been solved without any smoking gun. There’s rarely a smoking gun. You gotta be there in time to see the gun before it quits smoking for one! 🙂
I agree. I don't think there was enough evidence. Too much time had passed. And the 'staged' crime scene looked like someone was in the middle of a burglary but got spooked and ran. That's why the garbage bag was left on the bedroom floor.
The female attorney from Rochester is absolutely disturbing. What a sick, opportunistic, woman.
Her smirk that she would not have hired that guy if he agreed with the original death time says it all
@@Youtubing5999 yes. Yucky
@@Youtubing5999 Exactly this. The DA hired him because she knew he'd give her the answer she wanted.
@@Youtubing5999: Tendentious.
She's a lawyer ... sooooo
“this is just a hiccup” GIRL WHAT😂😂😂😂
Dum duh dum dum. 😮
If you don’t have a witness to a crime, just hire a consultant that will say what you want.
this case in a nutshell 😔
lmaoooo literally 💀
I found myself on the fence about his innocence or guilt but I was certain that he should have never went to trial. To many unknowns for a prosecution to proceed with the evidence it did as facts. I can understand why the daughter moved out of the country. This was America at it’s worst.
Agree.
guilty imo but not beyond a reasonable doubt , thee were a few more things this show didnt touch on
@@tankthearc9875 gone are the days when the show would give us the entire picture.
Well, there are certainly a lot of countries that are much worse on the corruption when it comes to the judicial system. But I would agree. Too much reasonable doubt, not enough evidence. Let God judge him if he did it.
These reporters did an an absolutely horrible job in this. Where was the character witnesses, work associates, friends, other family? Why did he run? Separate kid from mothers parents? If he ‘snapped’ why??!! I could go on, but you get the point.
Just wondering why, if it was a stranger, they made it look like a robbery but took nothing, leaving all the valuables behind. That bit just doesn't make sense to me!
@@Mataylor17 Good point.
Maybe it was exactly why they didn’t look at anyone else .. staged apparently automatically means it was the husband , maybe the killer had the same idea the cops did
@@jessicamartinelli274 Another good thought!
We walked in on a burglar one day and all the music equipment cords were cut and the duffel bag was sitting on the floor, ready to put everything into it. But he heard us and ran out the back door.
I don't think the scene was staged. I think he heard Kathy or the little girl and was interrupted!!
I totally agree with you. Why to stage the crime scene? woman was not raped, and no DNA from any stranger was found at the crime scene!
I can never understand how people put people in jail with absolutely no evidence. This hurts my heart.
Well there wasn't no evidence. She was definitely killed in her sleep which would make the time window for someone else to have killed her very narrow. Staged crime scene and shoe print. Completely the wrong MO for the other guy. No foreign DNA. Still looks a bit thin, but you and I were not on the jury and did not hear all the evidence.
There was evidence, circumstantial. I think he was guilty.
@@Ceerads I could never have said he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, jurries can't just convict based on feelings.
I think they had to blame someobody and they had nobody else so they pinned it on him, i'm not saying he didn't do it but his guilt def wasn't beyond a reasonable doubt!
Because 1+1=2
Who else killed her like that?? A random person....?! No, a person close to her
They didn't prove he was guilty.
We weren’t at the trial. We just watched a little tv show.
They proved he was guilty until proven innocent. This was sad
@@touchofdumband then we are spamming in the comment section
@@edwinthomas618He’s guilty alright.
@@dana2708 there are other cases that point to the husband when they cant find any outside DNA. It's not so unusual as far as that respect. And as far as that other guy, it was not his MO at all. First of all he would have been there with her husband there because of the time but most importantly, she wasnt raped and he wouldn't have put an axe through her head more than likely. I think you are correct, it was definitely the husband.
Unbelievable that someone could be convicted and sentenced to jail with absolutely no evidence. The jury got this wrong.
All of the testimony and all of the exhibits presented in court are evidence.
@@GH-oi2jf Evidence is DNA, fingerprints, blood splatter, witnesses, CCTV, etc. They had none of that. Hearsay/opinion is not properly evidence.
There have been numerous crime scenes without the perpetrator's DNA or fingerprints present. That doesn't mean there wasn't an intruder.
Exactly
I think the fact they kept looking for someone to give them a time of death that gave them a case says it all! They knew they didn't have a case!I feel so bad for Sara. When she said she's now had both her parents taken from her, it's so unfair! I hope he is granted an appeal at least!
He passed away in prison this year after only 6 months.
The fact that he lied about having a Ph.D to get his job at Kodak was very important. Wish they'd interviewed the two different women he "briefly" married after the killing. When they said it was obvious the 3-yr old baby had dressed herself it broke me.
A very close relative was (wrongly) convicted of having falsified a Covid document to be able to register his new residence. He hasn't murdered anyone yet.
Hello prosecutor.
When people say “he doesn’t look like a killer,” I always wonder “what does a killer look like?” It comes down to “bad genes” and bad hygiene, or simply a strange look in their eye. While I don’t recommend allowing strangers unrestricted access to your life, I also suggest we stop looking at strangers and judging them by their appearance.
Obviously it's a ridiculous thing to say
Like the lady said “Ted Bundy didn’t look like a serial killer” either.
Ugh yes and no. Some are predictable while some aren't. However, I would say wife murders have a different appearance than serial/mass murders.
@@betty0672 Except Ted Bundy did look like a serial killer; if you know what you're looking for, you can't stop seeing it.
Clearly categorizing a killer based on appearance is not a solid trusted method.
This was a tough case.
Wow if you lose this case as a defense lawyer you should retire. Absolutely no concrete evidence. Scary there are people out there who think like this and could be jurors
That verdict is questionable. The poor daughter left the country. It’s probably too much to bear 😢
I think I know how this man feels. When I moved into an apartment after 10 years living in a camper van, after about 3 months my next door accused me of making banging noises and waking him. I'm 67 years old and I absolutely do not make noise of any kind. They backed off the eviction but now I know how it feels. Its horrible.
It's funny and irritating at the same time ...to see prosecution and detectives saying
" I have no doubt in my mind"
when there is a clear REASONABLE DOUBT in this case
Exactly!
@@sirmadam8183 to tell one is guilty..NO ...but to have a reasonable doubt..YES.... it's enough
If it wasn't so pathetic it'd be laughable. There wasn't any proof.
Scary when the police decide you're guilty and you're not.
Prosecutions like this make me sick. Such a waste of taxpayer money. And so traumatizing for the wrongly accused.
It's disgusting. I would hate to be in that mans shoes if he was truly innocent.
Didn’t we all just watch a little TV show? Were any of us at the trial? Rushing to judgment rampant on this board.
Remember, many TV shows are crafted to infuriate the audience. That’s why the most annoying contestant on reality show stays till the last episode.
lol there is more evidence then this show showed . everyone is a yt expert now
@@touchofdumb here is what i found , an electric blanket was used to throw off time of death, also food was undigested in her stomach she was murdered that night not morning , bingo now we know why the jury swung that way , the yt detectives here think they know it all.
@@touchofdumbTrue, but there was no established motive and the prosecution decided to go after the guy after over 40 years as a last chance ditch effort.
“Some people may say that we were looking for an opinion..”
“Somebody who would pick a time of death that was before he left the house in order to secure an indictment”
“Absolutely”
“But if in fact, Dr had agreed with the other medical examiners, would you have hired him?”
“Absolutely not” 😄😄
Her smile after saying that was ridiculous
It was just her reaction to a real dumb question.
Patent misconduct.
@@markprange4386 It’s common practice. NO attorney would put an expert on the stand whose testimony contradicts their case. The only way it’d be misconduct is if they paid them to say what they wanted them to say or they knowingly used an unqualified person’s opinion.
That smile was the window into her soul. Not pretty.
I actually watch this episode twice to ascertain how this man was convicted. He hag poor defense lawyers. Just cases of Boat shoes ??
What could possibly have been his motive? No affair, no insurance policy, no divorce, no child custody battle, etc
His wife during his trial was spouse #4. It seems we didn't get ALL the evidence and other details that may have been presented in court.
@@paxetbonum7270☝️
His current house looked very luxury. Who knows he got her life insurance. He obviously worked a way up to build up his wealth. He also found a woman who loves him unconditionally #4 wife.
Her admission to the time of death expert says it all. She cares not for justice. She and the detectives just want to pin it on someone. Disgusting individuals.
I so agree.
That's our "justice" system - it has nothing to do with justice or solving a crime. It has everything to do with winning or losing in court, period. As you saw here, they will do anything to win, regardless of justice.
I agree! They were probably just forced to close some cold cases to justify tax payers money being spent.
💯%
Unreasonable conclusion on your part. She was convinced that she had her guy, so yes, she did what she could to prove it.
way too many ads... fix it 48 hours.
A 3½ year old girl left alone all day will definitely play with all the things she would otherwise not be allowed to! A silver tea set, Mommy's purse! Looked like she was having a tea party on the floor.
It’s hard to tell for sure without being able to look closely at all the of the pictures of the house-but the “staged burglary” stuff like the tea set being out and the purse being spilled out could very well have been the daughter. She was there all day by herself. That seems like exactly what my daughter would have done at 3 years old if she’d been left home alone…get into all the shiny things she wasn’t allowed to touch.
Exactly.
Great points! My 3 year old was the same! 🤔
I didn't even think of that but yes! I have a 4 year old and I can totally see this happening. The only thing that defies that is the adult shoe print on the garbage bag - but maybe Sara put the shoe on there and moved it? All in all just too many doubts and unknowns. He should have never been found guilty.
This is great thinking on your part. I never thought of that, it makes sense.
I wonder if anybody asked.
The jurors and others said, "The forensics did not point to anybody else," but neglected to acknowledge the evidence didn't directly point to James, either. A lack of evidence pointing towards someone else doesn't make another person guilty. That's not how it works.
Thank you 48 Hours for feeding my addiction to true crime! 💜💜
There's certainly no shortage of your drug of choice . . . . they'll be making these episodes for 100 years and still never tell half the stories.
That many 😮😮
What's the story about the girl who loved horses and he lured her to come to his farm
Either there was evidence that 48hrs didn’t share from the trial or the jury heard something else…but what was the motive? Was there an affair or insurance payout? We’re they having trouble? People don’t just do things like this with no motive. I saw an enormous amount of reasonable doubt.
seems like they might have been having marital trouble due to some minor evidence regarding marriage counseling
Really! P.S. What the hell does it mean that someone "snapped"?
'If' he did do it, letting him remain free for 40 years, is basically letting him get away with it. Sentenced to prison at the very end of your life, is no justice, no punishment.
“Scary if you did it.” Scary no matter what! If police accused me of killing someone, I’d be terrified. I know I’m innocent, but if they are accusing me, they probably have evidence or reasons that make me look guilty.
Or cook up evidence to prove their case.
Motive???! How did they prove him guilty without even discussing motive? This case makes me mad 😡
That's my question too. Even though prosecutors don't need motive I suppose the jury need one in order to send an old man at his age to life in prison.
The jury was there and saw and heard everything over that whole trial and testimony, evidence and everything else, , you and the rest of us only saw tiny sniplets of what 48 Hours wanted us to see and hear in a 40 minute film, the jury DECIDED based on everything, including all the evidence and testimony we didn't see or hear in this 40 minute film, the jury got it right.
@@HobbyOrganist
I don’t know. How could their expert witnesses make a determination about her time of death 40 years after the fact?? I don’t think they would have had a case without that testimony and the fact they “shopped” for an expert to give them the results they wanted, while discarding other pathologists opinions, speaks volumes.
Motive isn't a requirement. Not that I believe they proved he was guilty. But you can be guilty and not have the motive known
How bout a fact he was married 4 times
The boat shoe print on the garbage bag is very telling. He owned a pair of them. What burglar commits his crimes wearing boat shoes? Also, she most likely wouldn't have still been asleep at 6:30 when he says he left. She would've been waking up to take care of her young daughter. He did it in the wee morning hours while she was sound asleep.
Ummm, I am not convinced he’s guilty. Condolences to the family and may the truth come out someday 🙏🏾
Me either, not enough evidence
Same. I thought that I was missing something bc I couldn't convict beyond a reasonable doubt and was surprised they came to a guilty verdict
Did I miss the part where they looked for DNA on the ax handles or any evidence they may have collected?
@@deeannwatson4453 I must have missed it too!
I would have never thought he was guilty! The whole thing is hazy. I don't think he would have left that little girl, his daughter, by herself for so long with her dead mother. That is not something a loving father would do. So sad for all. 😢
True... but a loving father would not have put an ax in his wife's head either 🤷🤷🤷
@@edski8536 I don't believe he did it. Just my opinion.
I also think if someone is that deranged to do something so horrible to the mother , they would have no issues hurting the little girl as well, its odd that they didn't.
Every woman who has ever been cheated on thought the same thing about their man.
💯
This is a tragic miscarriage of justice. It is beyond me how anyone could have found him guilty. The evidence wasn't there.
Is it POSSIBLE that Sarah, as a little girl left unattended for hours, could have taken that silver set out of the bag? It looks like it was set up for a tea party.
Agreed. I thought the same thing.
That is an excellent point. The child was there all day, who knows what she got into. We're talking about a 3 1/2 year old child.
Exactly my thoughts. And did they check if she had eaten at all that day, etc. Obviously she's still a baby but with the proper counselors she could have provided some real insight.
I thought the same!
great point!
As a African American man I tried to do everything I can to stay out and away from trouble because if they could convict an old man with a 40 year old case and absolutely no evidence at all what would they do to me.
Unbelievable. A jury of your peers is the scariest thing. I hope they all realize that a life of a person is not a guessing or opinionated game and that they could have the same thing happen to them. How often do we see people wrongfully convicted over circumstantial evidence. Way to fail.
In law school one of my professors told us that if you did it, get a jury (because you’ll have some chance of getting off), but if you didn’t do it, get a judge. He said a judge will be able to weed through the evidence and understands the burden of proof whereas the jury will go by their feelings and their misunderstanding of the law. A jury might also convict you simply because you’re the one sitting in that seat and “why would they charge him if he didn’t do it?” 🤦♀️ Good luck trying to explain the “presumption of innocence” to newly minted US citizens who didn’t grow up with that standard.
Seems like the prosecutor and cops were dead set on him. It's a shame they care so little about putting what could very well be an innocent father and husband in prison. There wasn't enough evidence. I'm really surprised how this turned out.
He died in prison 6 months after the trial too. I could not have found him guilty on what they had against him. Shameful.
They don't care about justice. They only care about CONVICTIONS.
"JIM, he is SOO HONEST!!!" He LIED about having a PHD to get to KODAK. Such an HONEST guy! WOW! LMFAO
Who doesn’t lie to get a better job???
@@NilDreams Lots of people probably?
Lying to get a better job & murdering someone are two very different things, & he was in the program for a PhD he didn’t finish … so maybe he put it when he was planning to finish & then when he didn’t finish he wasn’t gonna tell anyone that , doesn’t make him a murderer .
I considered this as well. Her family was saying he was keeping her and their daughter away from them. Narcissists lie, they have a mask, and they isolate so they can control the victims. He was able to portray "nice guy" facade, that is why his current wife is so on his side. I think he did it.
you may ask "what kind of person would leave their own 3 year old child alone with a deceased person all day long"? And I would say the kind of person who would off their own wife and the mother of their child would do something like that.
Ikr
jesus, that poor three-year-old child being so confused about seeing her dead mother in bed with an axe in her head
Children tell the truth at that age. She would have said it was her 'daddy' if she saw her father but she said she saw a man. What is so hard about believing the truth. I hope you are never on a jury.
@@davidc3839 dude, i'm just sympathizing with a very young child in a terrible situation. is that not okay with you?
The daughter supported her father. I am just in a lot of pain today and I hate injustices. This man died waiting for his appeal and his daughter lost him to a brutal prison system on concocted evidence of a corrupt system. The judge should have stopped the trial at its early stages for lack of evidence. The worst client to have in America is an innocent one because the whole system is geared towards convicting people, innocent or guilty. America is known in the Western world for having an inadequate justice system. This was just another case of its gross failure. I'm glad I don't live in America. Americans are programmed to say...we have the best - when they don't.. America is far from the best place to live in the world and suffers from corruption. The best place to live is in Sweden. America is ranked number four but I think that is a gross exaggeration. Plus, the child saw a man - she did not mention her father or mother. Children don't lie in these situations but the police and the prosecution lied through their teeth.. @@mm5929
@@davidc3839she said she saw a “man of many colors”, the poor little girl didn’t even know what she saw. It happened to be her mom covered in blood.
You don't know that you are guessing. The police are worse they are corrupt. The American justice system is corrupt. Tell me how you know that is what she meant. Children are honest about those things and they know their parents by sight - you are plain wrong.@@betty0672
HE DID IT! Glad to see that Cathy's father got to live long enough to see his daughter get justice.
This is the definition of a witch hunt 😢
reminds me of the Trump trials
It seems a weak case. He could have done it or he might not. I wouldn't have convicted.
Man the way his new wife speaks is a huge red flag
I hate when grown women talk like little girls.
She's out to lunch
Did you consider that she is upset and traumatized by the situation? You’re all very rude for your comments.
I'm not convinced that the husband did it. Honestly, there's nothing in this case that makes me suspect the husband, either. It's one of those cases I think the police just really want it to be him. Not saying he couldn't have done it, but not a single thing proves his guilt.
Why is her family so convinced it was the husband? Only the couple’s daughter believes he’s not guilty. I just don’t get why Cathy’s dad and cousin blame him so vehemently. I’m full of doubts about the fake crime scene. No rape and no burglary. What was the motive then?
that points to him though, no rape no robbery no other dna at the scene ,
Because the serial rapist and killer had already died in 2014 and the family had no one to blame so there’s the end or closure of the cold case before Cathy’s father dies.
@@mushy18100that’s truly sad in every way
@@tankthearc9875that’s exactly where my doubts are based
She doesn't think he did it because he's raised her to believe he didn't do it. Kathy's father didn't think he did it until many many years later. Maybe they wouldn't have turned on him if he didn't keep Kathy's daughter from them intentionally.
i'm amazed how people think that they know a person from inside out...if you're 18 and older you're not "naive", it's called "stupid".