GUILTY GA - Tara Baker, 23, Athens, 19 Jan 2001 *Arrest 2024*

[rebelchild]

Jury went home at 8:00 pm and will return at 9:00 am tomorrow

 

[concernedcitizen706]

Edric Faust just found guilty on all counts.

That was a surprise. Considering no evidence was presented. 98% of the trial was talking about the ex-boyfriend's DNA being there. When it shouldn't have been, considering the ex bf said the last time he saw her in person was 10 days before. I don't know how that happened.

 

[rebelchild]

Edric Faust just found guilty on all counts.

That was a surprise. Considering no evidence was presented. 98% of the trial was talking about the ex-boyfriend's DNA being there. When it shouldn't have been, considering the ex bf said the last time he saw her in person was 10 days before. I don't know how that happened.

It was testified to that he (the boyfriend) had been with her on the Saturday or Sunday prior to her death which fell within the time for how long DNA can stay present. And Mr. Faust DNA shouldn't have been present anywhere near her so to find his DNA where they found it was a huge factor in finding him guilty I'm sure. IMO.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

It was testified to that he (the boyfriend) had been with her on the Saturday or Sunday prior to her death which fell within the time for how long DNA can stay present. And Mr. Faust DNA shouldn't have been present anywhere near her so to find his DNA where they found it was a huge factor in finding him guilty I'm sure. IMO.

It was testified to that he (the boyfriend) had been with her on the Saturday or Sunday prior to her death which fell within the time for how long DNA can stay present. And Mr. Faust DNA shouldn't have been present anywhere near her so to find his DNA where they found it was a huge factor in finding him guilty I'm sure. IMO.

Yeah did you see the part where he lied about it for 23 years and then the agent had to ask him last year 10 times to change his story and she gave him the date to change it to? And finally after she harassed him into changing the date he finally changed it. Was that really acceptable to you? And why was it?

 

[concernedcitizen706]

It was testified to that he (the boyfriend) had been with her on the Saturday or Sunday prior to her death which fell within the time for how long DNA can stay present. And Mr. Faust DNA shouldn't have been present anywhere near her so to find his DNA where they found it was a huge factor in finding him guilty I'm sure. IMO.

And also even if we take the 5 days as truth, oral DNA only lasts for one day. Maximum. Why was her boyfriends oral DNA in her mouth after 5 days? Why was his pubic hair and his DNA in her anal region,? After she just got brutally sodomized. She doesn't shower? You don't think that's a little coincidental there?

Why did he say he didn't see her for 10 days before this. It sounds to me like they broke up. So the police woman was saying oh it's good and right that his DNA and pubic hair should be in her genital areas, because that's how it should be. Did the gbi woman ever consider that maybe they broke up, if they hadn't seen each other for 10 days and they live in the same town. Poor Tara she tried to break up with him, and he wouldn't let her go.

 

[dotr]

Edrick Faust found guilty on all counts in Tara Baker's murder - Now Georgia

ATHENS, Ga. — After 12 hours of deliberations, jurors reached a verdict Tuesday afternoon in the cold-case murder trial of University of Georgia law student

nowgeorgia.com

rbbm
'Monday’s deliberations consisted of the jury re-watching GBI investigator William Ricketts’ testimony and reviewing DNA analysis. A sentence hearing is scheduled for 3 p.m. Thursday.'

Feb 17, 2026
Edrick Faust faced 12 felony charges related to the murder of UGA law student Tara Baker in January 2001 in Athens, Georgia.

 

[rebelchild]

Yeah did you see the part where he lied about it for 23 years and then the agent had to ask him last year 10 times to change his story and she gave him the date to change it to? And finally after she harassed him into changing the date he finally changed it. Was that really acceptable to you? And why was it?

No, what I seen was that he gave a statement to the police within a day or two of the murder stating the last time he was with her was the Saturday or Sunday prior when she came to see him at his parents home. And 23 years later was when he had trouble recalling how many days it had been. Funny how we can watch the same trial and hear things differently. So what is acceptable to me may not be acceptable by you .. and I don't have a problem with that

 

[rebelchild]

And also even if we take the 5 days as truth, oral DNA only lasts for one day. Maximum. Why was her boyfriends oral DNA in her mouth after 5 days? Why was his pubic hair and his DNA in her anal region,? After she just got brutally sodomized. She doesn't shower? You don't think that's a little coincidental there?

Why did he say he didn't see her for 10 days before this. It sounds to me like they broke up. So the police woman was saying oh it's good and right that his DNA and pubic hair should be in her genital areas, because that's how it should be. Did the gbi woman ever consider that maybe they broke up, if they hadn't seen each other for 10 days and they live in the same town. Poor Tara she tried to break up with him, and he wouldn't let her go.

how did Faust DNA get anywhere near her genital area? I mean he stated to police that he didn't know her or her friends and didn't go anywhere near that part of the neighborhood? And I'm pretty sure the hair came back to match one of her roommates.

edit by me for spelling ..

 

[concernedcitizen706]

No, what I seen was that he gave a statement to the police within a day or two of the murder stating the last time he was with her was the Saturday or Sunday prior when she came to see him at his parents home. And 23 years later was when he had trouble recalling how many days it had been. Funny how we can watch the same trial and hear things differently. So what is acceptable to me may not be acceptable by you .. and I don't have a problem with that

Really? I guess it doesn't look like we did watch the same trial. The boyfriend Chris originally said he saw Tara the last time the weekend before. So the Sunday before last would be like 10 days. Which was what Chris stuck with for 23 years. If he'd actually said it was the Saturday or Sunday on that same week, that would have been him saying it was 5 days before the crime, which was what the prosecution presented at the end.

If Chris would have originally said it was 5 days, then the gbi woman would not have tried 10 times to get Chris to CHANGE the date last year. She would have just read the notes or transcript of what Chris said to investigators the first time, right after the murder. So that's clearly not what Chris said the first time for over 23 years.

But I'm going to look over the trial and I'm going to find where it says what Chris told police the very first time and see where that is in the transcript. And then quote you that. But it stands the reason that the gbi woman would not try to get him to change the date if they actually had him saying that supposedly correct date for over 23 years. That supposed correct date would be in the original transcript and notes.

A boyfriend slash borderline fiance can't remember the last time he saw his murderer fiance the days after the murder? He gets it wrong by a week? That really seems realistic to you?

He probably also had to stick with that real timeline even if it was longer, because they probably had their phone records too. And they would have to have some kind of phone call to show that they met. Plus the roommates would have seen when they were together and where they were together. So that was the date Chris stuck to for 20 some years.

But the gbi woman tried a year ago, for 10 times during that interview with the gbi woman, and Chris would not change the date to a closer date, because he knows he'd stuck with the original day for 23 years. And then did you hear the part where the gbi woman was like, if you change the date for us then we won't do anything to you and you can run along your way. And then Chris finally changed the date to a false date for the gbi woman.

The gbi forcing this man to change the date is actually tampering with evidence. Trying to get a witness to change their testimony to fit with what police want it to, is tampering with evidence.

And if police have no problem tampering with evidence with witnesses 23 years later, do you think they'll have a problem tampering with DNA evidence 23 years later? I don't think they would.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

how did Faust DNA get anywhere near her genital area? I mean he stated to police that he didn't know her or her friends and didn't go anywhere near that part of the neighborhood? And I'm pretty sure the hair came back to match one of her roommates.

edit by me for spelling ..

Well you realize none of that DNA was seminal fluid. So any person could have gotten it on themselves when they went out the night before. Maybe the suspect worked at a restaurant she ate at. Maybe they both went to the nearby Walmart that night and he handed her an item in line. And she got his saliva on her hands and spread it around her body when she got dressed that morning. I mean they didn't find it the first time, so it probably wasn't much DNA.

The other possibility is a guy she got together with that night, got Fausts DNA on him right before he went over. Maybe faust sold the guy some items that night. And the guy got the saliva on his hands and then got it on Tara with his hands. I mean according to my impression it doesn't take much.

Another possibility is, we know the lab mislabeled the vaginal and oral swabs. So how do we know that doesn't reflect that they accidentally put them in the wrong areas to swab. Maybe they did it twice and that's why they got the different cells on them. I mean if you can't correctly label THREE types of swabs, in a very important murder case, then you've got problems. I don't know that not being able to correctly label THREE types of swabs, shows incompetence. I mean everyday they correctly label three types of swabs in that lab, I'm sure. The same thing over and over for the sex assault kits. And I'm sure they have done it correctly for years. But somehow, for the Tara Baker case, t hey just couldn't get it together enough to correctly label three swabs. It just happened to her case for some reason. I don't think anybody would be that incompetent. I think that more likely points to corruption.

The another possibility is last year someone in police who was corrupt, tampered with the evidence. And I believe that's a very real possibility.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

how did Faust DNA get anywhere near her genital area? I mean he stated to police that he didn't know her or her friends and didn't go anywhere near that part of the neighborhood? And I'm pretty sure the hair came back to match one of her roommates.

edit by me for spelling ..

No the pubic hair came back to match Chris Melton, with a distant match to one of her female roommates because apparently they are distantly related.

And I don't think her female roommates sodomized Tara Baker. In addition Chris's DNA was in her rectal area as well. Even though he hadn't seen her in 5 days according to the gbi. So that supports the fact that it was also Chris's hair.

 

[rebelchild]

We could come up with scenarios all day long to support either side. However, none of those scenarios were in evidence. I find it reasonable to believe that someones DNA could be in a home of their girlfriend whom they have spent time with and dated for years over a strangers DNA that you pick up from touching something at a restaurant.

Fact of the matter is he was found guilty by a jury after they listened to all the testimony and re-listened to parts of the testimony, re-examined the DNA reports, and spent hours deliberating. IMO they got it right. In your opinion, they did not.

I'm not here to convince you of anything. I am only here to give my opinion of the evidence as I heard it, just as you are doing.

 

[moonglow123]

Initially posted February 2.

Defense showing pictures of Chris Melton, Tara Baker's boyfriend, hands days after her murder.

View attachment 642167

https://twitter.com/x/status/2018384281614328256

I know Faust was found guilty but Melton's hands looking like that after the murder is definitely very strange. IDK if that quite looks like it's from punching a wall..

 

[concernedcitizen706]

We could come up with scenarios all day long to support either side. However, none of those scenarios were in evidence. I find it reasonable to believe that someones DNA could be in a home of their girlfriend whom they have spent time with and dated for years over a strangers DNA that you pick up from touching something at a restaurant.

Fact of the matter is he was found guilty by a jury after they listened to all the testimony and re-listened to parts of the testimony, re-examined the DNA reports, and spent hours deliberating. IMO they got it right. In your opinion, they did not.

I'm not here to convince you of anything. I am only here to give my opinion of the evidence as I heard it, just as you are doing.

Well then you're disregarding that a boyfriend or husband can ever harm a girlfriend or wife. Because even a girlfriend does have a right to say "No". Even a girlfriend has a right to break up with a boyfriend. Or take a break from a boyfriend. And that's not okay if he comes over there when the woman does not want him to. So no, his DNA does not have an automatic right to be at a girlfriends house and in her private parts. I guess we disagree on that.

And no, the DNA should not be there when he wasn't supposed to be there, and lied for years that he was not there. So you can have your own opinions but you can't have your own opinions on the facts. And the fact is that Chris Melton lied about his whereabouts for 23 years. An innocent person doesn't do that. And the other fact is, Chris only changed the story of his alibi, when the GBI, who knew that he was lying, made him change his alibi. That's called tampering with evidence. That's not just an opinion, that's a fact. And if they tampered with that evidence there, to help the white guy, we have to question what other evidence did they tamper with. So those are the facts.

Now it can be your opinion that it doesn't matter if the police tamper with witnesses and present lies to us, it can be your opinion that police lies and witness tampering is okay. Sure, great, you're allowed to have that opinion. A jury of his peers believed the white guy over the black guy, because the white guy had the police supporting his lies. The black guy had no one supporting him. And again, that can be your opinion whether that's okay or not. We can agree to disagree on whether a trial based on police lies are okay and good enough to put some guy away for life, I guess. We can each have our own opinion on that.

 

[rebelchild]

I'm sorry .. I am on break because I am working today so I don't have time to respond to everything you have said, however there are many things in that last message that has nothing to do with what I said. First of all, this has absolutely nothing to do with race .. at all .. and I'm not even going to address that any further. Second of all, I never mentioned anything even close to saying I think that a husband or boyfriend can not harm a woman. Please do not put those kind of words in my mouth. And third .. I do not remember any evidence at all about them breaking up. Quite the contrary from her roommates who testified that they were to spend the next day celebrating her birthday together and that she was looking forward to it.

I am done going back and forth with you since you want to make this personal just because someone does not agree with your conspiracy theory. I have work to do

 

[concernedcitizen706]

I'm sorry .. I am on break because I am working today so I don't have time to respond to everything you have said, however there are many things in that last message that has nothing to do with what I said. First of all, this has absolutely nothing to do with race .. at all .. and I'm not even going to address that any further. Second of all, I never mentioned anything even close to saying I think that a husband or boyfriend can not harm a woman. Please do not put those kind of words in my mouth. And third .. I do not remember any evidence at all about them breaking up. Quite the contrary from her roommates who testified that they were to spend the next day celebrating her birthday together and that she was looking forward to it.

I am done going back and forth with you since you want to make this personal just because someone does not agree with your conspiracy theory. I have work to do

I'm sorry if you feel like me correctly stating your opinions are not factually correct, is making it personal. But I'm not going to pretend that the wrong information you stated is factual, just so your feelings aren't hurt. If you assume automatically that a boyfriend has a right to have his DNA in his girlfriend's private areas, when he was not even supposed to be in the house, then yes you are implicitly stating your assumptions that a man has a right to a woman's body whenever he wants. That's just reality and I'm sorry if that feels personal to you. You are completely incurious about the fact that he lied about where he was on the night of his girlfriend's murder for 23 years. You apparently saw the trial and saw the testimony of the gbi woman leaning on the white man to lie about his alibi, over and over, right on camera. And you didn't remember it or care. It didn't seem to be a big deal to you. That shows you don't really have much concern that perhaps the boyfriend went over to her house when he should not have been there.

You commented before, that it's like normal that he should be in her house. And that the roommate said they were happy about birthday plans together. I don't believe the roommate ever specifically mentioned that Chris was going to be at their birthday celebrations. The roommate also said that there seemed to be a change in their relationship after the holidays. And that she didn't think the relationship was going to last much longer. So you are making assumptions that their relationship was good and that they were going to spend her birthday together. Unfortunately Tara is not around right now to tell us what the real story was, because she ended up murdered with Chris's DNA all over her. Chris's original alibi was that he hadn't seen Tara in 10 days, and right there that should be a sign of trouble. Most happy couples living in the same small town, don't go 10 days without seeing each other. I mean again you can have your own opinions but you can't act like your opinions are facts.

And of course you're not going to recognize the racism of a white police officer helping a white man to lie about his last time being at his girlfriend's house before she ended up murdered, when he shouldn't have been there. Apparently police making their witnesses lie in a murder case is no big deal, because you didn't make any comment against it. And if you don't make any comment against it, that means you kind of approve of it. Again that's not me being personal, that's me just correctly stating your opinions. Racial bias is unfortunately not usually seen by the people who have racial bias. Doesn't mean it's not there.