Add a Comment
- WOW add a #5, if we get to #10 maybe somebody can submit it to Letterman... Does everybody know that the two LA Times reporters were paid to tell thier side of the story as they see it. Here's something to think about; get a hold of Joel Rubin (LA Times reporter) and ask him why he didn't report that the husband failed a polygraph test back in the day. It's a fact! Why wouldn't he report that to the viewers? And there is no proof that the "victim" said she was being followed, the nurse who was featured in the 48 Hours segment who reports the following by some person with piercing eyes - was actually Sherri's former roomate, who was asked to move out when John moved in (Hummm). I suspect viewrs didn't know that either. It's a fact! Sometimes things seem too obvious, this is one of those times. Watch the Bros video on YouTube, "REASONABLE BAIL" Very interesting...
- Reply to this comment
- CSI Lover, like your very logical 4 reasons you gave they make so much sense.
Now about those eyes?? I add #5
Didn't the victim say when she was being followed that the person in a disguise following her had piercing eyes that could see right through someone. - Reply to this comment
- Incredible story. I remember when they announced the arrest of that police detective. It was the talk of the town. Here in L.A. that means this was a blockbuster, for everyone to be talking about this one news event. 23 years. 48 Hours Mystery did a good job in presenting facts that most of us here in the City hadn't heard before. I didn't know the husband was so indifferent. I feel for the father, he nailed it. If only that detective in the beginning would have listened to him. The other thing we (City) didn't know that the neighbor across from the victim wasn't questioned, none of her friends or coworkers as well. Nobody close to her was questioned, thats incredible. One of you all said the DNA might not be admissible in court based on how it was found stored in the coroners office. I say why not its her DNA regardless if the envelope was opened contaminated or whatever. This is a circumstantial case, and they're hard to prove, but, this one shouldn't be. Over the years l've seen so many circumstantial cases on this show with far less evidence than this, and over 98% of them resulted in convictions. Actaully in the 6 years l've been looking at this show i've seen 2 cases where the defendant got off. Another thing i've seen many cases in everyday life and on this show where, the police make some incredible obvious mistakes. One case on this show several weeks ago, this wife was murdered, in her hand she had a fistful of hair, and scrapings under her fingernails, they know this because the crime scene photographer photographed it, but the CSI people never got this out her hands or fingernails, her husband wound up being found guilty even though his hair was black, and the hair in this womans hands was blond. Its scary when you think this could happen, but it does, kudos to this womans father for not giving up.
- Reply to this comment
- I know the women cant be convicted on that(!!!)but have someone noticed this women's eyes?How freakish is that,monstrous!I also know that we all have the right to our day in court,but IMO,shes guilty without the shadow of a doubt.As for the victims husband,even tho,morally,his actions are very questionable,I dont think that hes guilty of something other of his guilty consciences.
I'm so afraid that the DNA wont be accepted as evidence!If thats the case,the poor victim would be one more time,victimized by the justice system.To put a cop in jail in the states,you need a well tied case.My thoughts all goes for the victim's family.They should sued the first detective in civil court.Hes a real SOB.I wonder if he would be able To lie in front of the father's face,knowing to well what he told him 23yrs ago. - Reply to this comment
- The woman police officer has several obstacles to overcome to be found innocent in the murder of this case:
1. Her bite marks were found on the deceased woman.
2. The woman police officer had sex with the man when he was engaged to the now deceased woman.
3. The police woman had the same gun and bullets that were determined to be used at the crime scene.
4. How convenient that the police woman reported that her snub nose Smith & Wessen was lost or stolen 2 weeks after the murder.
Therefore, it looks like besides a cover-up by the police department, there appears to be sufficient evidence to convict her for the brutal and senseless murder over jealousy. Finally, how about those eyes? - Reply to this comment
- I would think Stephanie is relieved - I mean she proabbly did not go there to kill her given her background - but carrying this secret for 23 years? That is a hard thing to do when you know you committed something this wrong - lots of mistooks - lots of places to point fingers - just sad that family couldn't have closure b/4 nowshe has actually lived 23 years the way she wanted - now she can pay the piper.
- Reply to this comment
- I remember exactly when I learned of Sherri's death. I knew her and liked her very much. Right from the start the family knew in their hearts and through Sherri's comments that Stephanie Lazarus was involved. They repeatedly told everyone that would listen but the LAPD would do nothing. I heard via the family that they felt John's old girlfriend was involved within 12 hours of the murder. I do hope that justice is done.
There is plenty of evidence-When they found her car...was their evidence in the car? Did Stephanie show up at work the next day or the next..This wasn't mentioned in the story last night. Seems to me from memory evidence was there. - Reply to this comment
- MY HEART GOES OUT TO THIS FAMILY. I JUST CAN'T EVEN BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING BEHIND THE SCREW-UP BEHIND THIS &/OR THE COVER-UP IT SEEMS THAT THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING. OH! & THE HUSBAND SOUNDS LIKE A NUMBER ONE LOSER, IT REALLY MAKES ME WONDER IF HE EVEN REALLY LOVED HIS WIFE....I MEAN HE ADMITS TO SLEEPING WITH HIS EX-GIRLFRIEND THE COP/WIFE-KILLER, THEN HE KEEP QUIET, & NOW HE IS SO HAPPY WITH A NEW WIFE & FAMILY....MAYBE SOMEONE SHOULD WARN HER TO BEWARE OF WHAT HAPPENS TO HIS WIVES....WHEN HIS EX-GIRLFRIEDS, FINDS OUT ABOUT THEM, BUT THEN AGAIN I GUESS SHE IS SAFE THE EX/GIRLFRIEND/COP/WIFE-KILLER..IS IN JAIL....SO HE IS FREE TO LIVE THE GOOD LIFE????? LEAVES ONE TO WONDER IF HE DIDN'T HAVE ALITTLE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT AS WELL??? AFTER ALL HE WAS JUST TO SILIENT, 25 YEARS AGO WHEN HIS FIRST WIFE SHOULD HAVE MATTERED TO HIM ENOUGH TO SPEAK OUT. THANK THE GOOD LORD ABOVE HER FAMILY LOVED & CARED ENOUGH ABOUT HER TO KEEP HER MEMORY ALIVE UNTIL HER KILLER WAS BROUGHT TO JUSTICE.
- Reply to this comment
- No question, a cover-up.... this woman was an "obvious" suspect. Incriminating circumstances surrounding her involvement with the victim and her husband is as plain as the nose on your face. Police corruption makes me cringe... it is much more prevalent than we realize.
- Reply to this comment
- My heart goes out to Sheri's family. It is absolutely mind boggling how in the world that lead detective could conduct himself in such a deplorable manner as to proceed with the case as if he was brain-dead. How his conscience wasn't kicking him in the behind, is beyond me. I think the only reason the evidence did not disappear at the hands of the accused, was divine intervention; because, surely she would have gotten rid of it, if found. As for Sheri's husband, if he did sleep with the accused, he slunk away out of of pure guilt, and was probably hoping the lead detective was correct with his asinine theory. God bless that wonderful family and the police detective that had the courage to open up that cold case. If the stars are in alignment as they should be, Det. Lazarus will not see the light of day as a free woman.
- Reply to this comment
