GUILTY IN - Melinda Lindsey, 23, shot to death, Porter County, 16 Jan 2015 - #2

[Tina Grant]

Set Her Soul Free, a question for you. A difficult one, but an important one.

When SL went ahead and cremated Lindsey without regard to informing family/friends, what did he do with her ashes? Did he hang onto them? Throw them away? Return them to her family?

If he just tossed them out, I would hope the prosecutor, next time around could use this as a further example, of many, that show what kind of man he is. Maybe he didn't even pick them up from the cremator?

Next time around I hope they spend more time making the case that Lindsey is the ONLY one who could have done it, because there was NOBODY ELSE in the house that night. He's an abusive a$$hole and a deadbeat dad, but that doesn't make him a murderer. The fact that he was the only one with motive and opportunity does, though.

 

[molly1255]

We knew his attorney planned on seeking a bond, but here's the latest. http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/...cle_a1087ca9-c999-515f-833f-ec9607b1638b.html

I laughed when I read the 2nd paragraph that he is a loving father of two children (one who he didn't pay child support for and the other he was looking at adoption sites), and that he could find immediate employment in his field. Really? He's admitted to abusing drugs and he is going to be retried for murdering his wife. I can't imagine any employer would risk hiring this guy.

Good points!

 

[molly1255]

So happy that bail was denied, at least the 2 babies will be safe from him.

And probably some other people, too!

 

[Set her soul free]

Set Her Soul Free, a question for you. A difficult one, but an important one.

When SL went ahead and cremated Lindsey without regard to informing family/friends, what did he do with her ashes? Did he hang onto them? Throw them away? Return them to her family?

If he just tossed them out, I would hope the prosecutor, next time around could use this as a further example, of many, that show what kind of man he is. Maybe he didn't even pick them up from the cremator?

Last I heard he has them (not long after she was cremated) I heard (via grapevine) that her parents asked for them && he offered them half of the ashes, however they refused bc they didn't want just half of her (didn't want to rip her in 2 so to speak) again I can not 100% confirm that but it was the last I had heard on it


#JusticeForMelinda

 

[Safeguard]

Next time around I hope they spend more time making the case that Lindsey is the ONLY one who could have done it, because there was NOBODY ELSE in the house that night. He's an abusive a$$hole and a deadbeat dad, but that doesn't make him a murderer. The fact that he was the only one with motive and opportunity does, though.

This^!! This is why I was so confident he would get a guilty verdict. Who else IS THERE, that had motive and opportunity? ArabianLovers awesome work on the airport time line was a hilarious example of the desperation with which the defense tried, (and FAILED!), to present an alternative suspect! ( and she couldn't even squeeze a bathroom break in there anywhere!!).

Feeling very relieved and thankful tonight, that the judge had the foresight to keep Melinda's killer right where he belongs until a permanent guilty verdict, will ensure that he remains there for the rest of his natural life.

I want to wish everyone a lovely thanksgiving, we all have so much to be thankful for.

 

[HistoryNut]

I'm so relieved bond was denied and that the prosecution will have four weeks to build their case next time. I think everyone here agrees that it is a complicated case and 2-1/2 weeks was not enough time to present everything to the jury. My faith in the justice system has been restored.

 

[BarryW]

Last I heard he has them (not long after she was cremated) I heard (via grapevine) that her parents asked for them && he offered them half of the ashes, however they refused bc they didn't want just half of her (didn't want to rip her in 2 so to speak) again I can not 100% confirm that but it was the last I had heard on it.


#JusticeForMelinda

I understand them not wanting 1/2. Hopefully they have them by now, or will have them soon.

Thank you for answering that sensitive question.

 

[ArabianLover]

I have heard attorneys say this for years:

"You never know what a jury is going to do."

It's so very true. No matter how careful the attorneys are during jury selection, a whacko can easily slip by. With CSI on TV an other shows, people think they "know" how this all works. Some jurors go into these trials EXPECTING the "CSI" type smoking gun. They want to see DNA, a video tape of the actual murder, etc. if they don't, they are voting not-guilty.

I believe if they present this case in a way that shows SL being a liar, a cheater, a manipulator, a user & a controlling, abusive husband (to both wives) this will set the stage. Then they need to move on to how he easily lives a double life by lying about working/not working. Being a "good dad & loving his children / yet refusing to pay child support and stealing his son's dog. Having a $1.1M life insurance policy on his 23 yo stay at home wife. Making that premium payment rather than paying child support. Taking out a credit card for a cruise and never making a payment. Build this all up to these supposed "stalking incidents" This way it is clear in the juror's minds that Melinda had been controlled and pretty much been held captive in that house for the last 5 years. This way the idea of a "stalker" suddenly coming back from her past sounds even more obsurd.

 

[Tina Grant]

I have heard attorneys say this for years:

"You never know what a jury is going to do."

It's so very true. No matter how careful the attorneys are during jury selection, a whacko can easily slip by. With CSI on TV an other shows, people think they "know" how this all works. Some jurors go into these trials EXPECTING the "CSI" type smoking gun. They want to see DNA, a video tape of the actual murder, etc. if they don't, they are voting not-guilty.

I believe if they present this case in a way that shows SL being a liar, a cheater, a manipulator, a user & a controlling, abusive husband (to both wives) this will set the stage. Then they need to move on to how he easily lives a double life by lying about working/not working. Being a "good dad & loving his children / yet refusing to pay child support and stealing his son's dog. Having a $1.1M life insurance policy on his 23 yo stay at home wife. Making that premium payment rather than paying child support. Taking out a credit card for a cruise and never making a payment. Build this all up to these supposed "stalking incidents" This way it is clear in the juror's minds that Melinda had been controlled and pretty much been held captive in that house for the last 5 years. This way the idea of a "stalker" suddenly coming back from her past sounds even more obsurd.

I just don't understand how ANYONE could hear about what happened and what Lindsey claimed happened, and believe there was anybody else in the house that night. I just don't get it. I hate to say so, but I have to suspect that those jurors held Melinda's past against her. The Blame the Victim defense at work.

I saw this for myself when I was on Jury duty, so I know it happens. Maybe I'm influenced by that, I don't know. But I just don't know what else it could be. He was desperate for money. He had a huge life insurance policy on her. She was shot with her own gun. There was nobody else in the house. HE DID IT! So something else is at work.

 

[ArabianLover]

I totally agree with you. "Blame the victim." You see it all the time. There were/are people who have visited this very thread who are buying into the stalker theory hook, line and sinker. And I believe this is all because of Melinda's past employment.

I have NEVER, ever heard of a stalking case where someone came out of a persons past from 5 years ago and BEGAN stalking. Now, I have heard of a stalker who has been an ON GOING problem. And that person went to jail for 5 years, was released, then RESUMED the stalking. But NEVER have I heard of someone just starting up stalking someone from 5 years in the past. NO WAY.

 

[BarryW]

I totally agree with you. "Blame the victim." You see it all the time. There were/are people who have visited this very thread who are buying into the stalker theory hook, line and sinker. And I believe this is all because of Melinda's past employment.

I have NEVER, ever heard of a stalking case where someone came out of a persons past from 5 years ago and BEGAN stalking. Now, I have heard of a stalker who has been an ON GOING problem. And that person went to jail for 5 years, was released, then RESUMED the stalking. But NEVER have I heard of someone just starting up stalking someone from 5 years in the past. NO WAY.

I too had wondered if her past was being held against her. She was years past that life, however it was mentioned that she was considering going back to dancing because of the family finances. No matter how bad the finances, I think that would not have been good for her and her baby, and it no doubt would make SL even angrier than he seemed to be all the time. It sounds like she was changing her life for the better (for her and the baby), and had she lived it would have been nice if she'd been able to get away from him. But that's all water under the bridge now.

It's hard to know why the jury voted the way they did. The defense lawyer's instructions, her past...I cannot think of any other single thing that might have swayed some jurors away from guilty. I'm very glad that another trial, a longer trial, is being held.

 

[SweetPea60]

I too had wondered if her past was being held against her. She was years past that life, however it was mentioned that she was considering going back to dancing because of the family finances. No matter how bad the finances, I think that would not have been good for her and her baby, and it no doubt would make SL even angrier than he seemed to be all the time. It sounds like she was changing her life for the better (for her and the baby), and had she lived it would have been nice if she'd been able to get away from him. But that's all water under the bridge now.

It's hard to know why the jury voted the way they did. The defense lawyer's instructions, her past...I cannot think of any other single thing that might have swayed some jurors away from guilty. I'm very glad that another trial, a longer trial, is being held.

BBM
I think SL is the source of that. Back at the beginning someone/a friend mentioned that she was looking for a waitress job.

 

[pappa rob]

I totally agree with you. "Blame the victim." You see it all the time. There were/are people who have visited this very thread who are buying into the stalker theory hook, line and sinker. And I believe this is all because of Melinda's past employment.

I have NEVER, ever heard of a stalking case where someone came out of a persons past from 5 years ago and BEGAN stalking. Now, I have heard of a stalker who has been an ON GOING problem. And that person went to jail for 5 years, was released, then RESUMED the stalking. But NEVER have I heard of someone just starting up stalking someone from 5 years in the past. NO WAY.

The only way that could happen was if the stalker was in jail for those 5 years, not that I'm saying there was another. The stalking and killing was done by the husband. If you wanted to prove your innocence why not let LE take any sample they want, unless you've got something to hide. Not letting them check his face for gun residue I think is pretty damming. Along with all the rest of the convoluted stories I don't see why they couldn't come up with a conviction. Whatever she did in the past, or in the present should have no bearing on the case at all. So far as I'm concerned shouldn't be allowed to be mentioned. I'm sick an tired about hearing about the defendant's rights, how about Melinda's rights?

 

[HistoryNut]

I completely agree with you on all counts. I don't understand how anyone could believe there was a stalker and it sickens me that SL's attorney vilified Melinda by bringing up her past and saying she wanted to go back to dancing. If that were true, she could have easily done it, but she got a job as a waitress instead.

While these tactics may have worked this time, I hope a longer trial will enable the prosecution to remove any doubt that SL is the only one who was in the house that night. I also hope they will spend more time showing that Melinda was a loving mother, daughter, sister, and friend who was victimized and terrorized by a narcissistic, controlling husband who was the only person on earth who had a motive for her death.

I just pray that the next 12 jurors will see what is so blatantly obvious to the rest of us and ignore the subterfuge the defense will undoubtedly use again.

 

[Tina Grant]

Whatever she did in the past, or in the present should have no bearing on the case at all. So far as I'm concerned shouldn't be allowed to be mentioned.

I totally agree. It doesn't matter who she was or what she did for a living 5 years ago - or five days ago. Nor does it matter that Lindsey was an abusive husband or a deadbeat dad, except as it goes to motive. ALL that matters is what happened in that room that night. She was shot with her own gun. He was the only one in the house. That is ALL that matters and all that needs to be proven.

 

[BarryW]

I totally agree. It doesn't matter who she was or what she did for a living 5 years ago - or five days ago. Nor does it matter that Lindsey was an abusive husband or a deadbeat dad, except as it goes to motive. ALL that matters is what happened in that room that night. She was shot with her own gun. He was the only one in the house. That is ALL that matters and all that needs to be proven.

It absolutely should not matter. However, with a jury you are dealing with many mindsets, and it is difficult to know what goes on in their minds while they make their determination. That's why I'm not sure if our courts should rely on jurors re guilt or innocence. Too much wiggle room for error.

 

[Tina Grant]

It absolutely should not matter. However, with a jury you are dealing with many mindsets, and it is difficult to know what goes on in their minds while they make their determination. That's why I'm not sure if our courts should rely on jurors re guilt or innocence. Too much wiggle room for error.

Better 12 jurors than one corrupt judge. Not every judge is wise, fair, or honest, which is why we are better off with the jury system. It's not perfect - but neither are people - so better a jury than a judge for sale.

 

[ArabianLover]

This case is one where the jury needs to use their common sense. They need to look past all the "smoke & mirrors" put on by the defense.

 

[cardinalgirl]

Set Her Soul Free--do you know what happened to the Justice For Melinda FB page? I went to post on it about how glad I was that bail was denied, but the page seems to have disappeared.

 

[Set her soul free]

It was taken down til after the trial.


#JusticeForMelinda