MISTRIAL CO - Dr. Leslie Mueller, 47, dies in fall from cliff, Lake City, 3 May 2008

[MicciStella]

Good points I agree ... But still to many points which are not adding up for me ..

The problem is in many things there is no prove one way or the other...

 

[Remove the covering]

The scratches on Fred Mueller's face look so familiar. Check out Gerard Baden Clay:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-of-wife-allison/story-e6freoof-1226601300871

I think scratches that occur vertically, in multiples, at this approximate width are likely fingernail marks. I was ready to believe Fred until he didn't have his glasses, and he mixed up his story.

I'm sorry, Leslie.

 

[MadamReporter]

Good points I agree ... But still to many points which are not adding up for me ..

The problem is in many things there is no prove one way or the other...

Up in these parts we call them there questions reasonable doubt

There is no way any of those jurors were convinced beyond what is required by law to convict someone of murder. They may have felt he was guilty or concocted a story in their own mind of why this happened, but in order to convict, the State must PROVE the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They can't just start little fires all over the place and hope it turns into a blaze by the jurors fanning it themselves.

I am actually on the fence about whether he did this or not, but there is no way in hell I would send this man to prison based on the non-case they put on against him....twice.

 

[ChelaCat]

[/B]

I am actually on the fence about whether he did this or not, but there is no way in hell I would send this man to prison based on the non-case they put on against him....twice.

As the one juror said, he would rather set a guilty man free than convict an innocent one. Too bad they couldn't prove their case beyond ARD.

 

[PandaJ]

I'm not totally convinced of his guilt.

-One of the things that stood out for me was how upset he was by the second hung jury. Had he been guilty, I would think he would be very relieved by a hung jury, not anguished.
-The fact that they were trying to have their son join them on their hike made me think this wasn't premeditated.
-They were REALLY reaching with the secretary's testimony and trying to spin her into being a mistress when she plainly said she didn't find him inappropriate and he never said anything sexual. Just sounded to me like her own husband has a jealousy issue.
-He remarried over a year (almost 2) after his wife's death. Don't forget, this was a family friend, so the getting-to-know-you is abbreviated.
-His wife's own parents support him. I usually weigh that heavily because when something like this happens I think the family of the victim will always scrutinize the closest and be the hardest to convince of your innocence.

I completely agree with you. I think there's a good chance he might be guilty, but I'm certainly not convinced of it.

I don't think they should try him for a third time. I think they should give it a rest unless they come up with more solid evidence against him.

Even IF he were to be tried for a third time and convicted, I can see people fighting for his release years from now, due to there not really being much evidence.

jmo

 

[MadamReporter]

http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2013/10/fred-and-leslie-mueller.html#disqus_thread

Eyes for Lies has rendered a guilty verdict in this case. The prosecutor should call her as their star witness.

 

[ChelaCat]

Looks like a third trial date has been set:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24316398/third-trial-set-texas-man-accused-drowning-wife

 

[ChelaCat]

Update/correction: while a trial date has been set for January (a third trial would have to happen w/in 90 days of last trial), it remains to be determined if prosecutors will proceed to third trial. They have until 10/29 to decide from what I can surmise.

 

[fran]

Montrose prosecutor won't try Fred Mueller a third time for murder

Texas businessman Frederick Mueller won't face a third trial on charges that he pushed his wife from a cliff and drowned her near their vacation home in Lake City in 2008.

Seventh Judicial District Attorney Dan Hotsenpiller filed a motion Tuesday to dismiss the case against Mueller rather than go forward with a third trial that had been scheduled for January.

Read more: Montrose prosecutor won't try Fred Mueller a third time for murder - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...ont-try-fred-mueller-third-time#ixzz2mGjZ31rU




No third trial for Frederick Mueller, man who blamed dog for his wife's deadly fall over cliff

article at link ........... http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...amed-dog-for-his-wifes-deadly-fall-over-cliff

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

I just re-watched the 48 hours episode again. I always thought his first trial was hung with the 11 guilty and 1 not guilty verdict.....and now I realize that that they were hung the other way. I simply can't believe 11 jurors believed his story....what a crock....the scratches on his face, the lack of injuries on Leslie's body after she supposedly fell such a distance, the odd demeanor of his kids who seem so forced to me and the weird and creepy way about him...he's so guilty IMO. He really bothers me....seems so lecherous.

On another note, I would really hate to be cross examined as a witness by Pamela Mackey, Fred's second defense attorney. She really slapped down the female water expert and I felt sorry for her.....she looked wrecked.

Also....their home is huge but it almost seems like a museum to me.....just an observation.
Need to re-watch the Dateline version now!

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

I was just reading an article on the case and one of the comments below it asks a good question whether Fred's clothes were wet....I hadn't thought of that and don't remember it being addressed.

 

[SunsetGirl]

I just watched tonight's Dateline episode "The Secrets of Cottonwood Creek" ... I really went back and forth on whether or not he would be found guilty by the jury.

My husband who has worked/hiked/roamed in the mountains and woods virtually his entire life - especially during that time of year (he worked for almost 20 years in the early spring on a mountainside doing maple sugaring) ... so he kind of knows a thing or two about getting scratches on one's face from brush/branches ... he had me pause the episode to tell me emphatically that whenever he's gotten scratches, they are ALWAYS horizontal (or diagonal) NEVER vertical!

Fred's story as presented was completely unbelievable.

P.S. I can't seem to fall to the soft ground from a standing position without getting at least a little bruised or scraped up ... or when hiking if we scramble over granite ledges and my leg rubs the rock (or sliding gracefully down on my butt) I usually get a tear in my clothes - synthetic fabrics seem to tear easily ... if Leslie actually 'swan-dived' 20 feet off a cliff landing head/shoulders first onto wet granite rocks below before the water carried her down several rocky waterfalls with no obvious injury or tears/marks on her clothing ... that would have been a miracle!

 

[SunsetGirl]

I hope my perception of Fred's story was merely from TV show editing ... what this family had to suffer through must have been very traumatic!!

 

[SunsetGirl]

https://m.facebook.com/48hours/posts/10152241721918496

The comments on this 48Hours FB page are interesting!

 

[ilovewings]

I am watching this case for the first time and what bothers me is that the police seemed like a dog with a bone. I am usually on the side of the prosecution, but in this case, I am not. What was the motive- he had no sweetie on the side and there was no monetary gain. I understand she didn't have injuries that should have been consistent with a fall. There was so much criticism about his demeanor, but for me that was not strong enough to believe he was guilty. What bothers me about this case, as have some others, is how the prosecution goes after a person they deem a suspect to the exclusion of all others, and they attempt to make the evidence fit the crime.

I can see why 2 juries could not find him guilty and I am frankly not surprised they did not try him again. They just did not have enough evidence for a guilty verdict. He may be guilty, but there is just too much reasonable doubt and finally the prosecution saw the light. They certainly made every effort to ruin his life.

 

[ilovewings]

Up in these parts we call them there questions reasonable doubt

There is no way any of those jurors were convinced beyond what is required by law to convict someone of murder. They may have felt he was guilty or concocted a story in their own mind of why this happened, but in order to convict, the State must PROVE the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They can't just start little fires all over the place and hope it turns into a blaze by the jurors fanning it themselves.

I am actually on the fence about whether he did this or not, but there is no way in hell I would send this man to prison based on the non-case they put on against him....twice.

Well here it is 2025 and I am seeing this case for the first time- no way in hell would I find this man guilty- this is a case looking for evidence and a theory: Glad my life doesn't rest with a theory of a small town sheriff who had a "bad vibe" about this man. Usually I find myself on the side of the prosecution, but not in this so called case. There was no motive---no chick waiting in the wings: no insurance policy: He may be guilty but there is not one iota of proof- in fact the first DA turned the case down. they had to wait for a new DA to prosecute the case. The defense presented a good case against the prosecution. I feel bad this man had to go thru all of this because some country bumpkin sheriff got a "bad vibe".