GUILTY GA - Eight family members brutally murdered in Brunswick home, 29 Aug 2009

[Soulmagent]

I want to point out as well that a grand jury turned down this indictment verses the preliminary hearing. The gag order will most likely be heard on the day of opening pretrial.
I found a copy of the true bill indictment one which it states the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to one of no contest ??? Am i reading this wrong?http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cach...rand+jury+indictment&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Have the results of that blood test ever been released?



I've read hundreds of pages of released evidence in the Caylee Anthony case, so I do not agree that "No DA or LE gives the results of any testings that have been done on the vast number of items taken." (Heck, in Caylee's case, document dumps are as thick as a magazine, ala Nancy Grace.) I also have noticed how very carefully LE chooses its words when making statements. They do not just talk off of the cuff. To say "the shorts had what appeared to be blood" means "we don't even have preliminary results yet." And preliminary testing can be done at the scene. To not call it "blood spatter" means it was NOT blood spatter. There was blood all over that trailer, from the ceilings to the drains. If those shorts were worn while the family was being beaten to death, they'd have been covered with blood spatter.

The Scott Dyleski case is quite different from this one, IMO. He was one guy beating one woman. He had time to grab various weapons without the worry of being discovered. He did not have six other people in the house, most of whom could have tried to control him or at least dial 911.

I am also quite intrigued by learning that hair was clutched in the hands of victim #4.........aside from all of our speculations that Guy was able to do this without waking anyone, we now know at least one of his victims appears to have fought with her murderer. And yet, no one else came to the rescue, or even made any attempt to escape. Just speculating, but that's an additional reason for me to wonder if more than one person was involved.

That is true but Georgia is not a Sunshine law state.

BBM

Yes, you are correct, since a law enforcement officer is not specialized in forensics they can only say that "it has the appearance of blood, etc." Until it is actually tested and the results come back from the lab to affirm that it is indeed blood no LE can come forth and say any different. They are not the experts. Even when they testify in court they still say "it appeared to be blood."

Also once again only personnel trained in forensics can testify legally in court whether the blood was blood spatter, transference or low velosity or high velosity. LE gathers the evidence they then turn it over to the proper credential people who will analyze it and most likely testify in court. Search warrants never states the end results. SWs are just the beginning of the ongoing investigation.

Sadly we do not know in which order these people died or who was able to wrestle with the defendant in order to have the hair in their hands. All we know is all of them lost their battle if they did try to defend themselves but if he used a hammer or a butt of a shotgun to bludgeon them to death..... several of them imo could have been rendered unconscious with one horrific powerful blow to the head. We have no clue when this crime happened. If it was midnight or after many of these victims may have already been asleep.

It will be interesting to see who victim number 4 is. I always have felt that the best evidence DAs usually have are from the victims themselves. Many things can be learned even though they are silenced in death their body tells the story of what happened to them and who did it.I think this case will be one of those cases.

I don't know when they received any of the forensics back. I do know that it certainly is possible for it happened in the Beason Illinois case where they fast tracked forensic evidence and got preliminary lab results back in 2-3 days and Chris Harris was arrested.

I still say if they had a bloody fingerprint or multiple ones throughout the house then it wouldn't take them long at all to identify the perpetrator once the fingerprint expert analyzed the fingerprints and cross matched them with Heinz Jr.

IIRC, Doering said he received two pieces of evidence and that is when Heinz was arrested. One if I remember correctly was a witness and the other seem to be a preliminary lab results. I still believe someone saw him near the crime scene when he told LE that he was no where close to his home at that time.

Brunswick is the same town that just had the trial of Edenfield who murdered 6 year old, Christopher Barrios. (sp?) I do think the DAs staff and LE personnel there are very capable of doing there job efficiently. The Edenfield trial was a death penalty case also and death was given by his jury.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I think the investigators in the Crowe case DID lie. They told Michael that they had found his hair in his little sister's hands and blood on a knife they told him they found in his room. They kept at him and at him until even HE thought maybe he did it but couldn't remember. Lying to suspects about evidence is considered to be acceptable in USA justice system, although I think it does more harm than good. I don't think LE is supposed to lie to the public......they're supposed to say "I'm not at liberty to discuss that." if it is something they shouldn't talk about.

Did they ever arrest and charge Michael with the crime? And wasn't he a teenager instead of a 22 year old man?

I haven't heard a word that Heinz has given a confession. Did he confess to the crime and somehow I just missed that?

tia

imo

 

[ebbie]

I find it most interesting that they recovered teeth throughout different rooms of the house. My post earlier today links source. Its unlikely he was aiming for the mouth so my guess is he must have been really wailing on his victims with something fairly large. A simple hammer doesn't seem to fit. I think something like a shotgun stock is it called? or a bat would be required to send teeth flying.

With no disrespect to the victims....this is starting to seem like one big game of clue: "It was Heinz... in the trailer... with the shotgun stock...."

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I find it most interesting that they recovered teeth throughout different rooms of the house. My post earlier today links source. Its unlikely he was aiming for the mouth so my guess is he must have been really wailing on his victims with something fairly large. A simple hammer doesn't seem to fit. I think something like a shotgun stock is it called? or a bat would be required to send teeth flying.

With no disrespect to the victims....this is starting to seem like one big game of clue: "It was Heinz... in the trailer... with the shotgun stock...."

Ebbie, I think a hammer would be even worse that the stock of a shotgun. A hammer is what Duncan used to kill Mark McKenzie, Slade Greone and Brenda Greone. It is a very vicious brutal bludgeoning weapon.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I want to point out as well that a grand jury turned down this indictment verses the preliminary hearing. The gag order will most likely be heard on the day of opening pretrial.
I found a copy of the true bill indictment one which it states the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to one of no contest ??? Am i reading this wrong?http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cach...rand+jury+indictment&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Well I am confused. Heinz didnt have a preliminary hearing did he?

http://jacksonville.com/news/georgi...ght_murder_counts_in_brunswick_beating_deaths

A Glynn County grand jury indicted Guy Heinze Jr. today on eight counts of murder in the Aug. 29 beating deaths of his father and seven others in a mobile home north of Brunswick.

Heinze, 22, is also charged with aggravated assault with intent to murder in the severe beating of Byron Jimerson Jr., 3, who lived at New Hope Mobile Home Park with his mother, Chrissy Toler, 22, and Joseph L. West, 30, both of whom were slain.

Almost immediately after Superior Court Judge Stephen Scarlett received the indictment in court, District Attorney Stephen Kelley filed notice he would seek the death penalty

 

[Soulmagent]

A grand jury hearing takes place in front of jury members (members of the community).

In a preliminary hearing there is a judge.
So no.

Also in the link you just posted OBE here is the witness you speak of that Doering mentions 'There was only one witness, Glynn County Police investigator William V. Daras, Kelley said." And I think that has to do with the statement Daras made in another article (the first one Greg H posted) about the live victims looking shot. IMO that is what he presented to the grand jury and he was there only witness for the grand jury I do not believe they have any other witness that seen or heard anything as they would have been called to the grand jury. I do think all 3 people other then GuyJr on the 911 will be called to the trial.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

A grand jury hearing takes place in front of jury members (members of the community).

In a preliminary hearing there is a judge.
So no.

Also in the link you just posted OBE here is the witness you speak of that Doering mentions 'There was only one witness, Glynn County Police investigator William V. Daras, Kelley said." And I think that has to do with the statement Daras made in another article (the first one Greg H posted) about the live victims looking shot. IMO that is what he presented to the grand jury and he was there only witness for the grand jury I do not believe they have any other witness that seen or heard anything as they would have been called to the grand jury. I do think all 3 people other then GuyJr on the 911 will be called to the trial.

Yes, I understand how a GJ works. I have been on a GJ before.

I am still confused though, sorry I have been grouting tile all day. So were indictments handed down by the GJ or not? All the articles I have read said the GJ did indict on all charges and then the DA once the Judge got the certified papers back from the GJ, filed notice that this case was going to be a death penalty case. When I was on a GJ the lead investigator and the ME was called to testify. That also turned out to be a death penalty case.

"Almost immediately after Superior Court Judge Stephen Scarlett received the indictment in court, District Attorney Stephen Kelley filed notice he would seek the death penalty"

In a PH, there is only a presiding Judge and it is done in an open public courtroom.

As the lead investigator imo Daras had much more to say than just that Heinz knew how they were killed, imo. No way would a GJ just sit there and true bill all counts if that is all he had to say. GJs can ask as many questions as they want of the witnesses.

Does pleading NOLO mean that there will be just a penalty phase and not a trial? That part is also confusing to me. It is like well I am guilty but I am not going to admit it. I didn't even know someone could plead NOLO on mass murder charges.

imo

 

[GregH]

I want to point out as well that a grand jury turned down this indictment verses the preliminary hearing. The gag order will most likely be heard on the day of opening pretrial.
I found a copy of the true bill indictment one which it states the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to one of no contest ??? Am i reading this wrong?http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cach...rand+jury+indictment&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Thank you Soulmagent for posting the official "True bill indictment" (I had to look up the "True Bill" ) Wikpedia states: "Traditionally an indictment was handed up by a grand jury, which returned a "true bill" if it found cause to make the charge, or "no bill" if it did not find cause. Most common law jurisdictions (except for much of the United States) have abolished grand juries."
There are two blank lines lower on the indictment posted for possible signatures that say: 1) Not Guilty 2) Changes his/her plea to not guilty to one of Guilty/Nolo Contendere Neither line is signed. I don't see an Innocent/Not Guilty line? This appears to be a part of the form to me. IMO

 

[Soulmagent]

Yes, I understand how a GJ works. I have been on a GJ before.

I am still confused though, sorry I have been grouting tile all day. So were indictments handed down by the GJ or not? All the articles I have read said the GJ did indict on all charges and then the DA once the Judge got the certified papers back from the GJ, filed notice that this case was going to be a death penalty case. When I was on a GJ the lead investigator and the ME was called to testify. That also turned out to be a death penalty case.

"Almost immediately after Superior Court Judge Stephen Scarlett received the indictment in court, District Attorney Stephen Kelley filed notice he would seek the death penalty"

In a PH, there is only a presiding Judge and it is done in an open public courtroom.

As the lead investigator imo Daras had much more to say than just that Heinz knew how they were killed, imo. No way would a GJ just sit there and true bill all counts if that is all he had to say. GJs can ask as many questions as they want of the witnesses.

Does pleading NOLO mean that there will be just a penalty phase and not a trial? That part is also confusing to me. It is like well I am guilty but I am not going to admit it. I didn't even know someone could plead NOLO on mass murder charges.

imo

His case was presented to a grand jury and they decided to indict him ,had they not it would not be going to trail. Yes he was indicted but it was the jury decission to indict him. It is not exactly the same as a priliminary hearing in which a judge decides if there is enough evidence. If it were me I would want a prilim verses the grand jury ,but at trail I would want a jury not a judge to decide. I wanted to point out which his was as it is part of his case I felt it important.

Thank you Soulmagent for posting the official "True bill indictment" (I had to look up the "True Bill" ) Wikpedia states: "Traditionally an indictment was handed up by a grand jury, which returned a "true bill" if it found cause to make the charge, or "no bill" if it did not find cause. Most common law jurisdictions (except for much of the United States) have abolished grand juries."
There are two blank lines lower on the indictment posted for possible signatures that say: 1) Not Guilty 2) Changes his/her plea to not guilty to one of Guilty/Nolo Contendere Neither line is signed. I don't see an Innocent/Not Guilty line? This appears to be a part of the form to me. IMO

I debated if it was part of the form as well . I would think it would have other pleading options but I guess that all the option you get in a DP case? It just confused me. I am going to look up other true bills and see whats on them.

 

[kgeaux]

Did they ever arrest and charge Michael with the crime? And wasn't he a teenager instead of a 22 year old man?

I haven't heard a word that Heinz has given a confession. Did he confess to the crime and somehow I just missed that?

tia

imo

You missed my point. Someone had posted that she did not believe investigators would lie in this case, and she referenced the Crowe case as an example of investigators being truthful but mistaken. In reality, they lied over and over. I believe her post was copied in mine; I was trying to make it clear exactly what I was responding to. Sorry you missed it!

 

[SkewedView]

You missed my point. Someone had posted that she did not believe investigators would lie in this case, and she referenced the Crowe case as an example of investigators being truthful but mistaken. In reality, they lied over and over. I believe her post was copied in mine; I was trying to make it clear exactly what I was responding to. Sorry you missed it!

That was me you were responding too - and I should note that we were talking about two entirely different types of lying - lying during questioning is standard LE procedure, and yes there was a ton of that going on in the Crowe case - but LE in the Crowe case never lied to the public (though I concede that they have never admitted their mistakes in the case, but what LEA does?). They told the truth when they said they were certain of things, it was just that they had 'bulldogged' the case and misled themselves over the merits of the case they had built, something that can happen in ANY arrest (thankfully it doesn't seem to happen all that often nowadays thanks to various checks in the system, but those can and do fail).

Am I saying that IS what happened here? No, the odds are against it...but, it is still a possibility that should be taken into account until the actual validity of their contentions is confirmed in a more reliable manner than the given word of the head of the investigating agency.

 

[kgeaux]

That was me you were responding too - and I should note that we were talking about two entirely different types of lying - lying during questioning is standard LE procedure, and yes there was a ton of that going on in the Crowe case - but LE in the Crowe case never lied to the public (though I concede that they have never admitted their mistakes in the case, but what LEA does?). They told the truth when they said they were certain of things, it was just that they had 'bulldogged' the case and misled themselves over the merits of the case they had built, something that can happen in ANY arrest (thankfully it doesn't seem to happen all that often nowadays thanks to various checks in the system, but those can and do fail).

Am I saying that IS what happened here? No, the odds are against it...but, it is still a possibility that should be taken into account until the actual validity of their contentions is confirmed in a more reliable manner than the given word of the head of the investigating agency.

I thought you were addressing LE lying to the public, but I wasn't "really" sure, so I tried to cover both points: LE lied to Michael and his parents, but they (as far as I know) used qualifiers when speaking to the public. (Along the lines of "It is my understanding that.....instead of saying "this is what happened." "I'm not at liberty to say" is used when they don't want to release information, and I believe that was used alot!) Since I have friends in LE, I do tend to parse their words with a great deal of attention: it is sometimes as interesting to note what is NOT said as what IS said. I learned this while sitting with my friends watching an LE/FBI news conference during the search for the identity of one of Louisiana's serial killers. My friend would say "Did you catch that? Think about that, because it is very important.") My friend is a lieutenant in LE, decades of experience, so he really got my attention!

In this case, I believe the fact that "appearance of blood" instead of "appearance of blood spatter" MAY be very significant. Or it may mean the spokesperson is just an old country boy using the least amount of words he possibly can! The sheriff alluded one day something along the lines of "everyone thinks we have no eye-witness, but "I" didn't say that!" which could lead one to believe there is an eye-witness and LE just hasn't released the info to the public, OR "there isn't an eyewitness, but I'm not telling you that!"

Although some locals have posted that this particular department of LE has had some rather serious credibility problems in the past, I'm willing to give LE the benefit of the doubt right now.......that they aren't deliberately, corruptly accusing Guy, that they may have more evidence that is being held back that explains their belief that Guy is the murderer, etc. HOWEVER, the possibility that they've developed tunnel vision and "bulldogged" the situation does exist.

I totally, totally agree with your last paragraph! I will always side on the possibility of INNOCENCE until I have all the facts to make a permanent decision!

 

[SkewedView]

I thought you were addressing LE lying to the public, but I wasn't "really" sure, so I tried to cover both points: LE lied to Michael and his parents, but they (as far as I know) used qualifiers when speaking to the public. (Along the lines of "It is my understanding that.....instead of saying "this is what happened." "I'm not at liberty to say" is used when they don't want to release information, and I believe that was used alot!) Since I have friends in LE, I do tend to parse their words with a great deal of attention: it is sometimes as interesting to note what is NOT said as what IS said. I learned this while sitting with my friends watching an LE/FBI news conference during the search for the identity of one of Louisiana's serial killers. My friend would say "Did you catch that? Think about that, because it is very important.") My friend is a lieutenant in LE, decades of experience, so he really got my attention!

In this case, I believe the fact that "appearance of blood" instead of "appearance of blood spatter" MAY be very significant. Or it may mean the spokesperson is just an old country boy using the least amount of words he possibly can! The sheriff alluded one day something along the lines of "everyone thinks we have no eye-witness, but "I" didn't say that!" which could lead one to believe there is an eye-witness and LE just hasn't released the info to the public, OR "there isn't an eyewitness, but I'm not telling you that!"

Although some locals have posted that this particular department of LE has had some rather serious credibility problems in the past, I'm willing to give LE the benefit of the doubt right now.......that they aren't deliberately, corruptly accusing Guy, that they may have more evidence that is being held back that explains their belief that Guy is the murderer, etc. HOWEVER, the possibility that they've developed tunnel vision and "bulldogged" the situation does exist.

I totally, totally agree with your last paragraph! I will always side on the possibility of INNOCENCE until I have all the facts to make a permanent decision!

Yeah, looks like we're coming from very similar veiwpoints on this - I too always expect a lot of careful phrasing from LE until a trial occurs, and have no problem with it, as it helps to keep the public feeling informed without endangering an investigation. I also try to aviod the old corruption/conspiracy theories as much as possible, as such theories often fail the KISS principle miserably, and I have too much respect for the LE profession as a whole as well.

My main concern right now with the investigation is that they said they weren't looking for any other suspects etc right when they made the arrest, which could bite them in the butt come trial time, as any unfollowed leads can be used by the defense to create reasonable doubt - this is why most departments wait until all the I's are dotted and T's crossed before making an arrest (unless they are concerned about the suspect doing a runner or striking again, which is not a concern here), even if they have 'sufficient proof of guilt' right off the bat - what counts as sufficient to get an indictment is not neccessarily sufficient to get a guilty verdict out of a jury, especially in a death penalty case.

 

[GregH]

I'm really angry to read posts on other sites using the term "poor white trash" It is an expression never used up here. Not that we are any better or more caring I guess. It's just a Southern expression. A dumb one and a hateful one.

Poverty in itself tells you very very little about a person and certainly nothing about their character.

Now back to interesting and intelligent cyber-sleuthing! The evidence list press release was very interesting.. As to the poor dead girl found with fistfuls of hair. The photos I have seen of Guy Heinze (and can be easily found on the Internet) show him with a buzz cut - both immediately after he called 911 and later as he was arrested for the murders. There are two other undated photos on line 1) Of the Toler and Heinze family smiling and sitting at a table at in a restaurant where Guy's hair is the same buzz cut. There is also what looks like just a family snapshot of Guy and two of the Toler boys in the back seat of car. Once again Guy Heinze has the same haircut. The article that talked about the evidence gathered mentioned that a pubic hair sample had to be taken from Guy Heinze in jail. I assume because he wears his hair so short that they were unable to get a sample.

I believe strongly that the real murderer(s) of this Heinous crime are still out there.

Thank God there was some light and good news in that the 3 year old boy is alive and doing better. There was nothing more specific in the press release than that. I pray he will recover fully. Has anyone heard any more on his condition?

Thanks to all of you for continuing to contribute here. It's very helpful and interesting.

Poverty is not a crime

Greg

 

[Soulmagent]

Another murder in glynn co.
It isnt related I just thought would share.
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:G7ONZwbECBkJ:www.news4jax.com/news/21557313/detail.html+brunswick+murder+supect+arrest&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[GregH]

Anything new on The Brunswick Murders of 8 people? I did read the three year old boy had been moved to a rehabilitation hospital.
I'm really impressed ( and disappointed) with Glynn County Police, DA etc. When they put a lid on something it has stayed a very tight lid since.
We are not nearly as sophisticated here in Boston, Politicians would exploit it for personal gain and leaks about the case would come from everywhere.

It is much better this was for the integrity of the case, an open minded jury pool and I hope the exoneration of Guy Heinze.

It is amazing though. Not one word that they have not officially released

 

[Soulmagent]

I search for stuff every few days on this case without any luck.

I disagree with the silence maintaining the integrity of the case. But then again I distrust Doerings words and with that I believe everyone should watch this case ,I kinda feel if the gag order is placed then somebody is hiding something from the public.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I search for stuff every few days on this case without any luck.

I disagree with the silence maintaining the integrity of the case. But then again I distrust Doerings words and with that I believe everyone should watch this case ,I kinda feel if the gag order is placed then somebody is hiding something from the public.

Didi they put out a gag order in the Christopher Barrios case that was just tried recently? I know the six year old little boy was raped and murdered in Brunswick, Georgia but I did not keep up with that case closely from the time it happened until it went to trial and Edenfield received the death penalty.

Did LE or the DA reveal their evidence beforehand in that case?

Just wondering.

imo

 

[Soulmagent]

No the court rejected a request for a gag order in that case and also LE did release information during the investigation. He was a missing child and they arrested the RSO the day after Christopher was reported missing and imformation was released as made such as when they were lead to his body and why the parents where arrested.The fact the wife of RSO's dad is saving her own sad ..
It was a very public criminal trail from start to finish. So if a gag order is imposed here It will send all kinds of redflags up in my mind.