Posts

Showing posts with the label bite mark evidence

Carol Ege

This case bothers me, a lot. It is a case in which the only apparent evidence against the defendant were eye witnesses that even the appeals court did not believe were very reliable. There were two trials and while the first trial had a bit more evidence, that was thrown out by the courts and a new trial was ordered. This is one of those cases where I feel as if I must be missing something because not only was the defendant convicted once, but twice. I am not going sit here and tell you that Carol Ege did not have a motive to kill Cindy Thompson or even that she may have liked to have seen her dead, or at the very least, out of her life. Two men say that Ege offered them $350 to kill Cindy Thompson but they claim hey did not go through with it and prosecutors had no evidence she convinced anyone else to do it. In fact, they argue that Carol Ege could not find anyone else so she did it herself, and yet there seemed to be no trace of her at the crime scene. On the mornin...