The Verdict

68 thoughts on “The Verdict”

1. I watched this trial on court TV and I remember when the judge recessed after the defense’s closing argument due to the weather. I remember thinking seriously?? That gives the prosecution the rest of the day and that night to revamp or beef up their closing argument. Definitely not fair. Also during the defense’s closing argument Prezioso objected 3 to 4 times which in my opinion made that appear to the jury as if the defense was lying during their closing. Again not fair to Melanie. But the most ridiculous thing was the State claiming that she used a towel to cover up the noise of the Resteciprocating Saw. That is beyond ridiculous, implausible and downright imbecilic to think that could happen. And as for her attorney, with all that he had going on, there was no way that he was giving his attention and his All to this case. This girl got the shaft up one side and down the other. It is sad and very wrong what has happened to her.

2. Thanks again ladies for doing this fine podcast.

   Wrongful convictions are very, very sad affairs … Kafkaesque to the innocents entwined. Tunnel vision and arrogance by police and prosecutors oftentimes play a big part.

3. She wasn’t wrongly convicted. Get your heads out of the sand. How much evidence do you need? Who else would have wanted him dead? She told her boyfriend not to worry about it the night they closed on the house when he asked her what the hell she was doing buying a house with Bill when she didn’t plan to stay with him. SO much evidence against Melanie. Now she thinks she can talk her way out of it because she has always assumed that she’s smarter than everyone else (like most narcissistic sociopaths do). And that bit about her getting rid of his clothes so quickly after he was gone… she says that in her mind, they were getting a divorce. AND? I’ve been through a divorce… it certainly would have never occurred to me to bag up all of his clothes and get rid of them. She knew he was dead and wouldn’t be needing his clothes.

   1. Lee Ann, there’s good news and bad news. The bad news is, everything you mentioned in your comment has been covered in the podcasts, apparently, you haven’t been listening. The good news is, I sincerely and truthfully believe you when you say, “I’ve been through a divorce…”

      1. DFC40: I’ve listened to every podcast, watched every television show and read every book that has featured this case… sure, Melanie “covered” everything. As I said before, she thinks she can talk and “act” her way out of anything. What about her absolutely ridiculous attempts at explaining her back and forth trips to Atlantic City, etc? The night they closed on the house and her lover was upset about it and asked her why she was buying a half million dollar house with someone she intended to divorce, she simply told him not to worry about it… “everything’s going to be okay.” Bill’s family suspected Melanie immediately and Bill and Melanie’s best friends,
         the Rices, were convinced that she had done it right after the funeral. She will never get out of prison because she was NOT wrongly convicted. She was the one who had the motive and means and all of the evidence points directly at her. She couldn’t even dredge up a single tear when she spoke to the detective or talked about Bill on the TV shows… her fake crying was pathetic and obvious. If you’re a friend or a family member of Melanie’s then I certainly understand why you wouldn’t want to believe that she was capable of doing this crime, but the majority of people are convinced that she did. And by the way, your comment about me being divorced was just juvenile. You can’t even disagree or have a conversation with someone with an opposing viewpoint without resorting to childish crap like that? Unbelievable.

         1. RED HERRINGS. Everything you mention in your comment is nothing but red herrings created by the media and prosecutor. What’re your thoughts on the actual evidence:
            1. 5 extensive forensic searches on the Woodbridge Apt where we are told by the Asst.Attorney General that this horrific crime was committed, failed to produce one shred of evidence.
            2. The victim was alive on 4/28, 6pm. At 12:40am of 4/30, there is a video, from the Flamingo Motel in AC, which depicts the victim’s car pulling into a parking spot. We later learn, “sawdust” was found on the driver’s side and passenger side floor which the prosecutor proved, through a forensic expert, contained connective tissue containing the victim’s DNA. So, he was alive at 6pm of 4/28 and dead by 12:40am of 4/30. That’s the prosecution’s timeline for the murder.
            That gives Melanie McGuire, approximately 30 hrs to commit the murder. Melanie’s whereabouts within that 30hr time period is corroborated by evidence. She talks about this time frame in one of the podcasts.
            3. Brad Miller, the alleged motive behind this gruesome crime, testified under a grant of immunity. Why would he need immunity? He also lied to the grand jury and admitted it at trial. That is a violation of his immunity agreement. The defense moved to impeach but the judge blew it off. Hmmm.
            4. Melaine McGuire passed a lie detector test.
            5. Where is the accomplice(s) that the Asst Atty Gen said helped commit this crime? Approximately 13 years have gone by, I think we were lied to.
            6. Why did the prosecutor keep the results of the cadaver dog searches of the cars and apartment secret?
            The list continues. Any comments?

   2. Lee Ann,

      I completely agree with you, and so did 12 jurors and several appeals judges.

   3. LeeAnn,
      Maybe you werent as mad as Melanie was when you got your divorce. Mine wasnt a divorce, but it was an angry breakup and i had his clothes packed in trash bags and in the garage before he had his lunch break from work the next day. When you get to the point where you are done you can be so done you just want it behind you. Fast. If, with all the evidence this podcast has shown you that is what you base your decision on, I guess theres not much can be said to you. I’d like to know tho, did you know Melanie? Bill? His sister? Did your husband cheat on you with a woman he worked with? You sound awfully bitter.

      1. Donna, I sound bitter? It’s a public forum and all of the television shows and books that have been written have been public as well. Last time I looked, anyone can post their opinion here. I don’t know what you’re getting at with the “husband cheating with a co-worker” comment. If you’re referring to my ex, we were fairly amicable when we split up. It was over 30 years ago and we had no children. If you’re talking about Bill and Melanie, both of them cheated on each other. By the way she describes it, they probably should have never gotten married in the first place. And no… I don’t know Melanie or any of the friends or family members. What does that have to do with anything? None of the jurors or the appellate judges knew any of them either. I assume you must be a friend or family member though as personal as you made your comment to me. There are hundreds of truly wrongly convicted people in prison all over America but I am positive that Melanie is not one of them. Not one thing has been said in these podcasts or in any of the books or on any of the television shows that have put any doubts in my mind regarding her conviction. If you are so convinced of her innocence, then gather up all of your evidence and proof and present it to an attorney or present it
         to several different judges. There are also quite a few non-profit organizations which look into cases where there are doubts about a conviction. Get busy.

         1. @ leeann,
            Anyone that states anything other then not guilty gets trolled and bullied on here it’s been happening for weeks. They troll you it’s disgusting. No respect for a different opinion. She’s guilty and exactly where she belongs at least the jury and court had common sense.

4. A Go Fund Me page has been set up for Melanie. There are many viable leads; but in order to pursue them, a private investigator must be hired. Any support is appreciated. Have very much appreciated your comments and thoughts, Jake and Julie.

   1. You’re welcome. I pray always that she finds justice.

5. My question here is directed to lawyers who have participated or will participate in this podcast series.

   Joe Tacopina was admitted into the Melaine McGuire murder case Pro Hac Vice. The attorney who vouched for Tacapina, was Stephen Turano. Turano had to submit an affidavit that Tacopina was in good standing in order for him to practice law in the State of New Jersey.

   QUESTION# 1. Is it ineffective assistance of counsel, if a lawyer fails to inform a client, the Court and the attorney attesting to his standing, that he would be conflicted if required to proceed with a defendant’s defense?

   QUESTION# 2. Is it ineffective assistance of counsel if the attorney who certifies that outside counsel is in good standing and during the course of a murder trial learns that circumstances surrounding the original affidavit have changed?

   Any criminal defendant on trial for his/her life would be deprived of their constitutional right to a fair trial if such were the case.

6. Lee Ann, tell that to the many spouses who have had ALL of their personal belongings thrown in the trash after abandoning their significant other. At least Melanie gave them away.

7. @Lee Ann, you seem much too angry to be someone who is just listening to the podcast as someone not associated with the case. You seem filled with hatred and anger toward Melanie. It leaves one to think that you are either a family member of Bill McGuire’s or somehow associated with the McGuire family. In any event this woman is innocent and was not given a fair trial or proper representation.

   1. Julie,
      Thats what i thought too. I think she knows someone, or has a connection of some kind.

   2. Julie, I am not a friend or
      A family member, (I live nowhere near New Jersey) but YES this case makes me angry, and YES, I think Melanie is a witch who thinks she can talk her way out of anything. I could say the same for all of you “poor innocent Melanie” supporters. You must be friends or family of hers. How could a hideous crime like this NOT make someone angry? Bill was a fairly young man who had his whole life ahead of him. He will not get to see his sons grow up, play sports, get married, etc. and the boys will live with the ghost of this horrible crime hanging over their heads for a lifetime. His friends and family will never be the same again either… it was a gruesome crime. As I told someone else who believes Melanie is innocent, gather up all of your evidence, arguments, and proof and start presenting it to any attorney, judge, or non-profit agency you can find to look at it. Arguing with someone like me who believes she is guilty isn’t accomplishing anything.
      If you’re truly convinced that she is innocent, do something about it.

      1. @Lee Ann,

         Amen thank you some one else with common sense, a voice and humanity for victims is in here and speaking. These people are like Manson followers it’s disgusting and this podcast has perpetuating it.

8. Lee Ann. You ask the question “Who else would have wanted him dead?” Truth is, we don’t know because the cops didn’t look at other suspects. If the body washed up in VA, I’m betting he was killed in VA. It may not have been a first degree thing, as in “wanting him dead,” but rather a manslaughter situation. Maybe there was a fight. It is much easier to kill someone in the heat of the moment when guns are available. (A lesson we need to learn again and again…)

   1. I agree. I too think he was most likely killed in Virginia since that’s where the body was found. Maybe the investigators should have investigated more thoroughly his associates in the Virginia area. As for the car being found in Atlantic City, the killer or Killers could have easily driven the car down to Atlantic City to throw the police off the track.

   2. And our courts dont convict on the idea of “well, if not her, then who?”

9. Right. Driving an empty car back to AC makes more sense than driving a car full of body parts from NJ down to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. If Bill new people in VA, he likely complained that his car was moved to the Flamingo. Perhaps this explains the missing footage after Melanie initially moved the car?

10. I know this was covered previously in the podcast regarding her being able to hurl the suitcases over the Chesapeake Bay bridge…when you think about the impossibility of that it’s amazing that her attorneys didn’t pound that into the jury’s minds. Suitcases on wheels are heavy enough when they’re empty let alone if there’s something in it. You’re talking about having a suitcase that contained a human head, another suitcase that contained two human legs of a man, and another suitcase that contained the torso and arms and hands of a man. There is no way that she would have been able to hurl those over the bridge herself and if by some chance she was able to they just would have dropped to the very bottom no way would she have been able to hurl them into the waters far enough. These suitcases we’re floating far enough out where fishermen were able to locate them. In my opinion whoever dumped those suitcases used a boat to bring the suitcases out into the waters. Did they ever check to see if there were any boat rentals in that area for that time period?? This case should have been common sense. But it wasn’t. Instead it was the prosecutor telling a fantastic story to 12 people who in my opinion we’re beyond gullible.

11. A boat. Exactly. That is logical. Far more logical than someone throwing suitcases off a bridge! I don’t think the VA police checked much. Lots of people rent boats, and lots of people own boats.

    1. Exactly Eddie. What they should have done was checked his associates in Virginia to see if any of them owned a boat or perhaps rented one during that time.

12. People talk about the circumstantial evidence against her and they talk about oh this seems strange and that seems strange… There really wasn’t many things that seemed strange. What did seem strange was the prosecutors version of what happened and anybody with common sense that would think about that story would have to realize that it makes no sense. What really galls me is that the prosecutor was able to stand up there and present evidence that did not exist.

    1. Julie, what the prosecutor did, and got away with, is this; in a criminal trial, neither side is allowed to speculate on evidence. There must be evidence, either its “direct” evidence or “circumstantial” or a combination of both to establish a fact. Throughout Melanie’s trial, the prosecutor used “speculation” to fill in the gaps of her miserable case. She was confronted at trial about this very tactic over and over again. Now, if anybody thinks I’m making this up or just pulling crap outta thin air, when the Appellate Division ruled on Melanie’s direct appeal a 3 judge panel wrote, “the prosecutor overstepped her bounds by referring to evidence that was not in the record.” In short, YOU CANT SPECULATE ON THE EXISTENCE OF EVIDENCE! In my opinion, this was reversible error on the grounds of prosecutorial misconduct. However, the judges gave her a pass!!! Hmmmm?

       You know what’s equally disturbing, those 12 morons who decided this case were given clear instructions, by the judge, on the difference between “circumstantial” evidence and “speculation.” Apparently, they were to busy reading newspapers and checking out what everybody was saying about them on the internet. (another contention of mine)

       Anybody interested in viewing the AD’s decision, I’ll gladly give you the cite.

       1. It’s hard to believe that she hasn’t been granted a new trial. The three-judge appellate panel even agreed that the prosecutor overstepped her bounds. That coupled with ineffective counsel and all that her lead attorney was going through you would think that it would be a no-brainer to Grant her a new trial.

13. why was the Virginia Police not as involved? Why did they not look for more suspects there? Like it was stated in the podcast Bill knew people in Virginia and wanted to move there so where is that missing piece. Maybe I missed that while listening but that is what I was stuck on regarding the investigation. Melanie seems to me to be suspicious and very arrogant which did not help her case as well. I honestly am stumped I don’t know that Melanie did it but I also have no evidence to accuse anyone else of this. The gambling seems to be plausible maybe but like I said before nothing is for sure there is no circumstantial evidence, only assumptions can be made. I don’t think she has a very good chance of getting released but what do I know! This case is driving me nuts!!

    1. Jamie G,
       Melanie is a very intelligent, confident, angry at what has been done to her woman, not suspicious and arrogant. And just because there were no other suspects doesnt mean she is guilty. It means no one investigated anyone else. It was tunnel vision from the beginning. I feel they were pressured to make an arrest so they made the easiest one, as often happens. The prosecutors want to win cases so they often charge the easiest one they can find. I would rather wait fo the actual killer to get caught but a lot of times convicting anyone is better than convicting no one. It looks better to have them all wrapped up when it comes promotion or election time.

14. And speaking of morons on the jury, can you believe not one thought there was enough reasonable doubt to show some backbone and hold out? They all voted to convict. Frightening for anyone accused of a crime. Our whole system needs to be revamped. Honestly, a person’s life depends on the personality of the jurors and whether one can stand up to peer pressure. So unfair.

    1. @Eddie: For me, it’s an either-or situation with this jury. Either they’re the dumbest collection of individuals to ever walk the face of the earth or something very sinister happened in that jury room. I have seen on TV where members of the jury in other high profile cases, have no problem defending their decision, however right or wrong it might seem. Not so with this jury, they’re in HIDING because they’re HIDING something.

    2. If i had been on the jury we would still be sitting there because she is not guilty and they could not have convinced, bullied or otherwise and got me to vote guilty

15. Eddie and DFC40, I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts on the jury. Our jury systems desperately needed to be reconstructed. And I too have wondered why this jury continues to remain in hiding…something is suspect. I wonder if it’s a matter of guilt over being pressured into convicting Melanie or something, like you stated, more sinister.

16. I too have always found it strange that they never wanted to be interviewed. Perhaps they had some fear of Prezioso. Unfortunately what I have found with a lot of juries is that they automatically go in with the concept that the person must be guilty. There are also some people that will believe that a prosecutor or a police officer would never lie. I also believe that some people are not intelligent enough to sit on a jury. I always have to wonder about when they come back with the question for the judge that they want reasonable doubt the defined. If you don’t know what reasonable doubt is then you should not be on a jury. This jury, I don’t think, really deliberated the case the way they should have because they justz in my opinion, came back too fast. But we’ll continue to just boggle me all the way around is how Prezioso was able to get up there and tell a complete fabrication. There was no evidence of any murder or any kind of crime being committed in that townhouse but yet she insisted that because there was no DNA that that was her proof. That’s like trying to go up to somebody and say the Fifth Third Bank was robbed…there’s no fingerprints,there’s no video footage of you, but we’re going to say that because of that lack of evidence were going to say you did it. How utterly ridiculous. She went on to say during her closing that Melanie used a painter’s tarp that she laid in the shower that would have soaked up any kind of blood. No proof, no evidence, no nothing and yet she was able to get away with that. How this case is not overturned is beyond me.

    1. Well put Julie, maybe that joke about juries is true, “the only ones that end up on jury duty are the ones too dumb to get out of it.”

       The McGuire jury was called into the judge’s chambers on 2 separate occasions because they got caught reading news articles and internet posts about the case. This was a trial that lasted apprx 7 weeks and every day for those 7 weeks that judge warned them, ad nauseam, about media exposure and they did it anyway! This jury misconduct was addressed in Melanie’s direct appeal and once again, those 3 Appellate judges blew it off.

       The last time I checked, violating a judge’s Order was considered a Contempt of Court and subject to punishment, let alone grounds for declaring a mistrial.
       As I said, something went seriously wrong with this jury.

       1. You have to wonder how these appellate judges are allowed to just dismiss a clear violation of the law. Very scary. So many innocent people are spending their life in jail. How these overzealous prosecutors and these judges lay their heads on pillows at night simply shocks the conscience.

17. To Meghan and Julie, I find this podcast being slightly more and more misrepresented. As being “unbiased” when you are only seeking, getting or able to get information from one side which is the defense. It’s fine to have a podcast questioning her guilt or her getting a fair trial but it’s far from an “unbiased” looking at “both sides”. Maybe you didn’t end up getting access to both sides but initially that being you intention. That’s clearly not what it is now. I think it’s important this is represented properly even by description as it’s so sensitive being that their is murder victim involved that is the real victim. He has a family that is subjected to the murder everyday and now this podcast. No matter what side your on I think that’s been lost and forgotten on this one sided podcast. The description should at least acknowledge that.

    1. I am not doing the podcast. The podcast is being done by Meghan and Amy. I am just a person who is listening to the podcast and commenting on it along with others. They did invite the other side to participate in the podcast and they chose not to participate. Maybe you don’t like the fact that the real truth is coming out. There are many facts that should have been presented to this jury that we’re not. Meghan and Amy have certainly stated when they found something that Melanie said to sound like it wasn’t truthful or they had doubts about something. I think maybe you just don’t like the fact that the real truth is coming out and that this woman did not commit this crime. Also if you are so convinced of her guilt why would this podcast bother you?? I would think that you would want the real killer and killers in prison instead of an innocent woman.

    2. To the hosts Meghan and Amy, I find this podcast being slightly more and more misrepresented. As being “unbiased” when you are only seeking, getting or able to get information from one side which is the defense. It’s fine to have a podcast questioning her guilt or her getting a fair trial but it’s far from an “unbiased” looking at “both sides”. Maybe you didn’t end up getting access to both sides but initially that being you intention. That’s clearly not what it is now. I think it’s important this is represented properly even by description as it’s so sensitive being that their is murder victim involved that is the real victim. He has a family that is subjected to the murder everyday and now this podcast. No matter what side your on I think that’s been lost and forgotten on this one sided podcast. The description should at least acknowledge that.

       1. @Allison, I’m standing outside of a restaurant, there’s a 15minute wait for a table, while I’m waiting, I’ll engage in another episode of Allison in Wonderland.
          I’m standing here reading one of your comments which accuses Dr Sacks and Dr Shlosberg of presenting the McGuire Case in a “biased” manner.

          The podcast has been produced by 2 well-respected criminologists who have spent 2 years investigating the McGuire case. It is an exposé of the Melanie McGuire case and its aftermath. Dr Sacks and Dr Shlosberg are both published writers in their field, teach at universities and just recently, Dr Shlosberg was invited to speak at Princeton. Both of them hold Ph.D.s in their respective fields. While reading your comment, I’m standing here wondering, what credentials do you possess that would put you on an equal footing with these 2 professors? All I’m seeing here is naked assertions with no supporting evidence. It makes me think that you are shifting the focus onto the hosts with these preposterous unjustified accusations while the rest of us are discussing the merits of the case.
          You, are entitled to your opinions regarding Melanie McGuire’s guilt or innocence, regardless of how inane they are. This series of podcasts, through the efforts of Dr Sacks and Dr Shlosberg, conducting experiments and interviewing experts, has cast serious doubts on the evidence used by the prosecution to convict an innocent person. I seriously doubt, that a person, such as yourself, who leads a pedestrian lifestyle, is qualified to call into question the integrity of the Dr Sacks and Dr Shlosberg.

          Contrary to your assertions, Ms McGuire IS NOT WHERE SHE BELONGS; the State of New Jersey did not prove McGuire’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. And if you find comfort in the fact that the reviewing courts upheld the trial courts verdict, then you are both wrong. Ms McGuire has maintained her innocence from day one, somewhere, in this broken down judicial system, there is one judge who will put this case in its proper perspective. The final chapter, in this case, has yet to be written.

          Anyone who agrees with you would have to disregard, that Ms McGuire passed a lie detector test; that the prosecution could not produce any evidence that Ms McGuire participated in or committed the murder within the prosecution’s timeline; that the prosecution failed to produce any evidence that the suitcases containing the victim’s body parts were transported, in a motor vehicle, across several state’s; that the star witness, Dr Miller lied under oath; that a detective gave false and misleading testimony under oath; that the prosecution, to date, never produced a shred of evidence of the existence or participation of an accomplice(s); Just to mention a few.
          Allison, You might be able to overlook these injustices: I cannot.

          As I stated in previous comments, just because you were an avid viewer of Court TV, you think you’re an authority on the McGuire case. Now that Court TV is over, and you don’t have 10 newscasters telling you what to think about the McGuire case and you are left to your own wits, your comments sound like a washing machine in a laundromat; Wash-Rinse-Spin. REPEAT: Wash-Rinse-Spin. REPEAT. Wash-Rinse-Spin. Repeat…
          Allison, the bottom line is this, you are a …

          “Gotta go my table is ready.”

          1. P.S. stop calling me an avid court tv watcher. You have no idea who I am or what I know about this case and I how I know it. I might be closer to the case then you think and know unreleased information never made public. STOP telling me what I don’t know and worry about what you DON’T know. I hope you enjoyed the restaurant.

18. I think this verdict was the correct one. It sounds like the lead attorney paid someone to do the computer graphics at most not write the closing if he even did. Unlike the hosts I don’t take her word for it as most of her words are lies and a far beyond rational truth. The prosecution always goes last this isn’t a scandal it’s their burden those are the laws. If the judge set a time limit for the closing it’s the same for the prosecution and the defense. I still stand by saying she had a good defense attorney and a defense strategy trust me she would of gotten torn apart on cross if she took the stand and that was still her decision to make and she chose NOT to. You can’t go back later when you don’t like the result and be mad because the prosecutor was really good and think she knows better strategy of what should of been done. That doesn’t work in an appeal.

    Their cases where defense lawyers have fallen asleep, were drunk during parts of trials that people are currently fighting for as being ineffective counsel. They actually are fighting with these obvious documented issues on court record. Not that this should be the standard but it is unfortunately. Their is nothing I’ve seen from
    watching the trial at the time or from listening to this podcast that I found so stunning or appalling that her lawyers did or did not do. If anything I find her to lack complete awareness of her actions and behaviors. She’s never said one kind thing on this podcast about her husband. Not one. Everything is about her. Everything is an excuse and blame on the people for everything that has happened to her. All of her thoughts revolve only around herself rarely around her children even only when it’s for sympathy. I find it shocking how the majority of commenters and the hosts overlook these behaviors. She is exactly where she needs to be and where she will always be. She might have people on the podcast fooled but good thing the court was not.

    1. Your hatred for Melanie is overwhelming. This podcast is about her actions during the time that she was married to him up to his death so of course she speaking about herself. It seems to me that maybe you’re afraid that a lawyer might want to pick up this case or an Innocence project might want to pick up this case and it’ll be proven that she did not commit this crime.

       1. Why because I think she is guilty do that equate “overwhelming hate” to you. What if I said your in love and infatuated with her because you think she’s not. It’s kind of ridiculous that your making statements like that against me.

          I’m not worried I can smell her desperation and if she had any actual legal standing at this point she wouldn’t on this podcast. This isn’t even who a done it. I only hear her desperately trying to find a legal loophole. You thinking the innocence project would pick up this case is laughable and insulting to them. No well known lawyer who overturns would be interested in this case. The are looking at people with actual innocence. As I said she’s exactly where she’s supposed 2 be and that’s where she will remain. Sorry not sorry.

          1. Hmmmm…..you obviously have a vested interest in this case or you wouldn’t be this upset that maybe a real investigation will prove that she was innocent.

             1. Julie, can you understand anything in Allison’s comment?
                I think her medication stopped working again : )

             2. I think you do. I just think she’s where she belongs and I’m confident that’s where she will stay

19. Allison, Melanie is in prison. We all know this. There’s no point in ranting about her on this forum where most of us believe she is innocent—a victim of circumstantial evidence. If there were forensic evidence tying her to the crime, that would be a different story. There IS forensic evidence and none of it matches her. There is also no plausible crime scene. And if you believe someone got into a car, drove from NJ to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge to throw suitcases full of body parts off of it, then I have a nice bridge to sell you. In the meantime, she’s in prison, and many believe she is wrongfully in prison. You clearly have some sort of personal hatred for her, so much so that if someone else confessed to the crime, you probably would still go on ranting about her. We get it. You hate Melanie. You are entitled to that, but you won’t get us to join you, so ask yourself why you feel such a need to spew hatred like this. For you this just seems so personal.

    1. Eddie,

       I’m not ranting I’m giving my opinion and the not most people but most people that listen to this podcast think she is innocent. Not most people who knew her or of her at the time like myself. Let’s be clear. I’m entitled to my opinion despite it being in the minority of this podcast and furthermore every time I state it I get a rude insulting comment back. This is the episode about the verdict so I’m stating I agree with it sorry if the 5-10 common other people that post on here don’t. I never attack them I only counter their attacks. I don’t need to justify my comments, thoughts, or opinion to you or anyone else on here. Difference of opinion was allowed last time I checked. If you call that hatred then so be it. I don’t care at this point. I don’t like anyone that is a murderer. This case isn’t even controversial go and look at cases that really cases of wrongful conviction pending.

       1. Allison,
          You will never convince us Melanie is guilty, and obviously you wont see the truth, so…..

    2. Allison,
       Ask yourself this…could you put 2 20 lb bags of kitty litter in a suitcase and hike it over a bridge railing? Now try 3 or 4 because they estimated the suitcase carrying his torso weighed close to 80lbs.
       The prosecution had no crime scene, no murder weapon, no nothing so they made up a story and spoon fed it to the jury. If Tacopina hadnt been high and trying to save money he could have maybe done a better job rebutting it. He was clearly phoning it in, tho. Did you even watch the trial?

20. Trashing someone repeatedly and at length on an internet comment forum constitutes ranting. You are likely not the only person on here who knows her. If you have something of evidentiary value to add, call the tip line. We get your opinion. It has been stated as nauseum.

    1. Well said Eddie.

    2. So has yours it’s been stated well beyond mine. If you don’t like my opinion that’s your problem, I’m not going to stop because the 10 people here don’t like it. If you didn’t guys didn’t give me nasty comments you probably wouldn’t hear so much from me.

21. What’s intriguing is that the prosecutor and Melanie’s lawyer had no problem going on television and the many programs where they received exposure and were interviewed in a controlled environment, but refused to respond or participate in this podcast. Podcasts are becoming very integral in giving a different point of view that the public can directly be involved in. Everyone is entitled to their opinion regarding her innocence or guilt and unless you can prove to me as the prosecutor stated that the murder happened in their apartment, then I don’t believe she is guilty. But a few seem to despise Melanie and criticize her because she didn’t act the way they wanted her to act or say what they expected her to say. Common sense is common sense. It shocks my conscience that the prosecutor was able to talk out of 2 sides of her mouth to cover all her bases to secure a conviction. If she says that the murder happened in the Woodbridge apartment then you darn well better prove to me that it happened there. She didn’t do that and everything she said thereafter is moot and suspect to me. The prosecution lost their credibility as far as I’m concerned because they went through that apartment 5 times and came up with zilch…nada…nothing. It seems as if they were so determined to find evidence their and when they didn’t they fabricated a theory that is not plausible. Their was no dna, blood, saw marks nor gunshot residue, etc. Saying that she cleaned that apartment so well and to the extent that Melanie was capable of doing things way better than the average person is over the top. She is not Wonder Woman. They made her sound as if she was the most intelligent and capable person yet on the other hand, it was inferred that she made stupid/dumb mistakes. I also believe that Melanie could have held her own on the stand versus the prosecutor who at one point said something to the affect, “don’t be fooled because the defendant is physically beautiful and doesn’t look like what one would perceive a murderer to look like.” Please tell, what does a murderer look like? The prosecutor came across as if she had a personal vendetta against Melanie during the trial and on the many tv shows she was on. Melanie’s lawyer said he wouldn’t rest until her conviction was reversed. Really…where is he now? Making up stories that affect people for the rest of their lives is unacceptable.

    May Bill rest peacefully, but I do not believe she is guilty and find her sentenceto be excessive. Their was a similar case with dismemberment involved across the river in New York City. The murderer was charged with manslaughter and served 17 years in prison…read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Alig. Melanie has lost her freedom, her children, her family, career, reputation, etc…this is not a game. The prosecutor told a salacious and sensationalized, exaggerated and very tall tale. The prosecutor thickened the plot with her twists and turns with a dash of this and heaping tablespoons of that to make everything fit whether it was true or not. The people prosecuting the crimes making up things for the sake of winning are just as bad as the criminals . Watching the clerk pronounce Melanie guilty still brings tears to my eyes whenever I watch it and still makes me sick to my stomach 12 years later. The evidence or lack of seems to support reasonable doubt and Melanie’s innocence moreso than guilt. I have no faith in our justice system. Prosecutors are given leeway to spin tall tales and are more concerned about making a name for themselves or winning the case. A person found guilty of a crime they didn’t commit and wasting one’s life away in prison is so hard to wrap my head around. People are so quick to think the worst of others and sit in judgement as if they’ve never done anything wrong in their lives. My intuition/gut instinct tells me that something ain’t right with the outcome of this trial and it hasn’t sat right with me since 2007.

    1. Tracy I wholeheartedly agree with you. And as was stated on this podcast the prosecutor was very angry that this podcast was going to be done. You have to wonder why. Maybe because this podcast brings the truth finally out in the open. The jury should have been made aware of all of these facts. Tracy, your post was excellent.

    2. Five Stars you Tracy
       *****

    3. Tracy,
       Michael Alig is a good example to bring up. He was guilty, he bragged about it, still seems somewhat proud of himself after his release in the interviews I have seen. Melanie was flat out railroaded. Michael Alig was a drug addicted, out of control young guy who butchered and cut up his friend for drugs, left him in his bath tub on ice until the smell got too bad and then dumped him, bragging the whole time about what he had done, and only did 17 years. Melanie had no evidence against her, they didnt know when or where Bill died, and she loudly protested her innocence from the beginning. She will be eligible for parole when she is 101. Fair?

       1. Not a good example

          Michael Aling was NEVER charged with first degree murder. He also admitted guilt and took responsibility. His admission of guilt was part of his plea deal which he took for first degree MANSLAUGHTER not murder. They are sentenced and looked at very differently in the eyes of the law. If he went to trial and was found guilty of first degree manslaughter he would of gotten a longer sentence then he did. Just because both of the cases have dismemberment in common does not make them similar. Dismemberment is the only similarity. There were several codefendants, witness testimony, and many other factors that are very different in his case then hers as in every murder case. You can’t paint every case with dismemberment with the same brush. Not fair to the circumstance or the victims of these cases and adds no value to the argument. I think what Michael Alig did was absolutely disgusting and horrific to say the least. He was smart to take the generous plea and admit his guilt on record. His outcome wouldn’t of been as good if found guilty at trial.

          **** no he did not plea down from a murder charge. Manslaughter in the first was his charge to start. A life was taken I’m just highlighting these differences because of the impact of sentencing. Furthermore nj has Nera for all violent crimes since the 90s. The No Early Release Act means you must do 85% of your sentence day for day. NY does not have that so Alig also was able to earn “good time” like a drug charge in nj would carry and your parole can be come quicker with that.

22. Another thing that was always completely strange is why anyone would give themselves that kind of cleanup if the murder was committed the way the state said that it was. To stand up there and say that their proof was because there was no DNA was beyond ridiculous. Even if you want to buy into their theory that she had all these cleaning solutions that would get rid of blood and all this other stuff that would have been associated with the murder, no one would take the chance of missing something or taking the chance of not getting it all cleaned up just so. The whole theory was completely insane. This jury lacked common sense and I do not believe that they deliberated the way they should have deliberated. Those twelve people just took the word of the prosecutor. Shame on them.

23. Thank you Julie and I agree with your points as well. I am also able to be objective and use common sense despite the fact that my family knows what murder feels like. I sincerely empathize with Bill McGuire’s family, but at the same time I don’t understand why the “accomplice” was never pursued. Having someone waste away in prison for the sake of having someone pay for a crime to close a case without exploring all avenues and bringing all to justice would not satisfy me.
    I can empathize with Bill McGuire’s family. My 19 year old niece was murdered by her 18 year old ex-boyfriend because she broke up with him. She was my sisters only child and like the child I never had. He lured her from our home under the guise that they were going to exchange belongings and that he needed her help with something. After she arrived at his home where his parents were present, he suggested they take a walk to talk. As they approached a somewhat isolated area, he pulled a butcher knife out of his hoodie and stabbed her repeatedly. He threw her cell phone and car keys into a nearby sump. He then went home and resumed watching tv with his parents like nothing happened. My beautiful niece was able to get up and stagger to the nearest house and faintly knock until the homeowner opened the door and summoned help. She gave a dying declaration which is how they found out who took her life. Murder of a loved one is something that you never get over and you are traumatized for life. I would never wish this type of pain on anyone. Unfortunately the murderer was deemed to have a “mental defect” at the time of the crime. In my opinion, anyone that murders another has a “mental defect.” I was always under the impression that they medicate the person until they are well enough to bring to trial. But their was no trial, no conviction, no victim impact statements nor any remorse. Though he coherently admitted to what he did and planned his heinous attack on a vulnerable, trusting and relationship naive, young, studious girl, he never sat before a jury. The prosecutor who was supposed to be fighting for justice for my family, was very friendly with the defendants attorney and put very little effort into pursuing true justice for my niece and my family. It is absolutely insane how the justice system works and the power that they have over our lives.

24. I am so sorry for your loss and for what your niece went through. I know how that can impact your life forever. Whether it is murder or suicide the tragedy never goes away. My father took his own life when I was 3 years old and I was in the home when it happened and I can tell you, I am 61 and I have never forgotten that night. As for our justice system it is very flawed. Again, sorry for your loss.

    1. Julie thank you for your kind words and condolences. I too am sorry for the tragedy that you and your family experienced as well. I wish you peace and blessings and may your father rest peacefully.

25. Tracy and Julie, my heart goes out to both of you. Truly. Thank you for your honest, thoughtful posts.

    1. Thank you Eddie. Your thoughtful and kind words are appreciated.

26. If someone else had done this e.g., an angry husband of a mistress or gambling dude, then who sent the letters to the DA? True, Melanie wasn’t convicted of that but it’s probably because the jurors thought she sent them but didn’t have enough evidence to convict her of it. One letter contained his wedding ring. What mobster is going to keep the victim’s wedding ring to send to the DA? Though I can see that the prosecution was lacking in evidence and her defense was fairly lame, I don’t think this podcast vindicates her entirely. My biggest problem w/the case (I watched it on TV while at home recuperating from surgery), is the complete lack of evidence showing it was done in the apt. That alone is reasonable doubt to me. I’m still undecided which translates into reasonable doubt. She should be free at this point.

27. Donna,

    I appreciate your questions and at least having civility which I have not received much of due to having the opposing opinion of the majority. I’m not trying to convince you, I’m stating mine which everyone is entitled to. I did follow the case, watched I watched the trial and I know some other information not disclosed in the trial. Every time I answer any question I get attacked by the same trolls just for responding to a question asked by someone like yourself. Just because my opinion isn’t the popular one its not respected and their is little respect or civility which is sad. It’s become exhausting and borderline bullying. I don’t mind answering questions and always have answer all questions asked of me. I think your question are good ones that involve common sense but I’m not going until. I know your not a troll but answering your questions will only engage them more. I wish this page was more respectful of every opinion.

Comments are closed.