Michelle DeSpain
On
August 24, 2011 Michelle DeSpain called 911 from her Jonesboro
Arkansas home and reported that she found her thirty-four year old
husband, Marc shot inside their home. Officers would arrive on the
scene and almost immediately knew things did not look right. While
Marc lay dead in the home, the house looked as if it had been
ransacked but in a way in which the investigators thought looked
staged. Soon as officers were surrounding the scene Marc's parents
and sister were on the scene. Michelle immediately let investigators
know that she believed Marc's father was involved in Marc's murder.
In
a situation such as this obviously those closest to the victim are
the first to be suspected but it is a rare case when a parent is
involved in the murder of their grown child. In fact, I have to say
that I cannot think of any particular cases off the top of my head.
Of course there are cases where parents kill their children but those
cases almost exclusively revolve around young children still living
in the home. The only off the cuff cases I can think of where a
parent has killed a grown child have not been “who done it”
cases. They almost always revolve around arguments at the home and
the parent readily confesses and in general will attempt self
defense. Marc's father, Jack, did not seem to fall into this
category, so why was Michelle telling investigators she was sure he
was involved? Well, they would learn later that Michelle's motive
was more self preservation but initially they had to look into it and
they really did not like what they saw. It was true that Jack and
Marc did not have a good relationship. Most of it had revolved
around the fact that Michelle's daughter from a previous
relationship, in which Marc and his family had taken as one of their
own, had supposedly accused Jack of molesting her. It seems that
while authorities did not believe the claims Michelle and Marc did
and cut off contact with his parents. They also had disputes over
money and property. Marc had followed in his parents' footsteps into
the real estate business but had attempted to separate as their
relationship soured. Investigators had to look into Michelle's
theory that Jack was involved but early on investigators were sure
this was not the right track. Of course they had to have the
evidence to prove their gut feelings and that too came rather
quickly. So now the case was at a stand still. For their part,
Marc's family was certain that Michelle, the mother of their
grandchildren, was the one involved in the crime.
The
case blew wide open when investigators got a tip that a man by the
name of Terrance Barker was boasting to people that he was involved
in the murder of Marc DeSpain. By May of 2012 four people would be
arrested and charged in the murder. They would include a man named
Johnny Hubbard, Terrance Barker, Michelle DeSpain and her father,
Carl Kelley. So, according to prosecutors a father was involved, but
it was Michelle's and not Marc's as Michelle attempted to convince
them.
The
evidence apparently followed the prosecution theory as to what
occurred and transpired in the crime so we will start there.
Prosecutors came to believe that Michelle and her father, Carl
Kelley, had come up with the idea of the murder. They believe the
motive was the nearly one million dollars in life insurance that
Michelle stood to inherit. They had learned that she had what they
called “a side lover” that she was financially supporting and
money was not coming in as it once was. It is believed that once
Michelle and Carl came up with the plan that Carl met up with Hubband
who introduced him to Barker. Michelle would lure Marc out of the
home during the lunch hour so that Barker could get into the home.
Witnesses would report seeing Carl Kelley's vehicle at the home at
the time of the murder and prosecutors would believe that he had
taken Barker to the home. Barker would tell investigators that while
he committed the murder that Kelley was on his phone giving a “play
by play” to someone, who they would come to believe was Michelle,
on the phone. Text messages between the two would confirm this to
investigators. They would believe that after killing Terrance the
home was ransacked to look as if it was a robbery and then Michelle
returned home only to call 911 and claim to report coming home to
find Marc dead.
In
the end no one ended up going to trial in this case as all four of
those involved would plead guilty. Johnny Hubbard would plead guilty
to hindering apprehension. He would also receive a probation
violation from a previous drug charge. Just exactly how much time he
got combined seemed to be a bit confusing. Some things say he
received eighteen years while others say the total was forty-eight
due to the probation violation. Terrance Barker would also plead
guilty to first degree murder, with the agreement to testify against
others if needed. He would receive a sentence of thirty-five years.
Next to plead was Carl Kelley. He too would plead guilty to first
degree murder and like Terrance receive a thirty-five sentence.
Michelle would be the last person to plea, in August of 2014 after
several delays in a trial. She was facing a capital murder charge
but after consulting with Marc's family it was agreed that she could
plead guilty to three counts of hindering apprehension and she
received a sentence of thirty years.
A
look at the Arkansas Department of Corrections shows that all of the
perpetrators remain in prison. The first person to face a parole
hearing is Michelle in 2019. Hubbard comes up for parole in 2025
(hence why information on his exact sentence seems sketchy at best)
and both Terrance and Carl are looking at the year 2036. One thing
that the DOC site showed, that most do not, was the programs that
each inmate participates in. According to that it appears that
Terrance and Carl have both participated in anger management courses
early on in their incarceration, and one or two more later. While
Michelle has participated is six different programs, Hubbard has
participated in none. I do not expect Michelle to make parole in 2019
considering the seriousness of not necessarily the charges she
pleaded to but her actual crime.
Not requesting you to publish this comment, as it's unrelated to this story (no general discussion post that I can find). I just want to give a suggestion for a case to cover.
ReplyDeleteI think the Kirstin Blaise Lobato case could be very interesting to feature on your blog. To me, it's one of those cases where guilt or innocence is a tough call, though Kirstin seems to have plenty of supporters.
At this time, I lean somewhat toward thinking that I would have voted to convict her if I was on either of the juries she faced. Granted, there's a lack of physical evidence against her, but there's also the fact that she confessed to a similar attack she claims was in self defense but which she also claims was against a different man than the man she was convicted of killing, weeks prior, but which hasn't so far been confirmed. Ms. Lobato was also an admitted drug user, so it's seemingly plausible she got dates confused. The impression I get, if I have the correct logical fallacy in mind, is that Kirstin's supporters expect the prosecution to disprove a negative.
I published it to met you know I put it on the list...its a long list that I'm trying to work through but sometimes I swap around on the days I'm not "feeling" it and try to grab one that grabs me.
DeleteAll right, thank you. To clarify the part about the fallacy, and however it's correctly phrased, I think Lobato's supporters want the prosecution to prove this second man doesn't exist. So I guess it's about trying to prove a negative for them. Either way, the case seems complicated. I think she's currently under consideration for a new trial.
DeleteMichelle was out 2018, and thanks to a crooked jailer, they're now married. It's a true match made in hell.
ReplyDelete