CONVICTION OVERTURNED MO - Kent Heitholt, 48, found murdered, Columbia, 1 Nov 2001

[Mitch1]

Scott Peterson had hair from his dead wife found in a pair of pliers on his boat. He had cement residue in the boat & at his warehouse, his cell phone pinged right by his house at the same time he claimed his wife "disappeared" when he said he left hours before to go fishing, then he placed himself at the very bay and spot where his wife and unborn baby's bodies washed ashore 4 months later. He was caught in multiple lies, told his mistress his wife had died, later attempted to flee, changed his looks, and there's so much more.

Apples & Oranges.

In Ryan's case you have an eye witness who lied and eventually recanted and...a "confession" that is not credible. Those were considered "direct evidence" and neither was true & reliable. There was a bloody crime scene. Where's the circumstantial evidence that points to Ryan? You can't convict based on what's imagined or on your 'feelings." You have to use the evidence presented and use evidence that's not been impeached or proven false. And that leaves nada.

Your right Apples & Oranges!!!
Ferguson & Friend admitted to being in the area the crime occurred (no cell pinging necessary), they admitted to Mallary they beat someone down that night, Shawna the janitor saw 2 males behaving suspiciously enough she went to get a co-worker. Then Erickson, you know, the one with a conscience, admits that him and Ferguson killed Kent. Hopefully they get the evidence needed to try and convict Ferguson again

Again you are right apples and oranges

 

[Mitch1]

OT: Ryan posted on his Facebook page, that he finally got his Dairy Queen!
So happy for him!

This just in: Florida is experiencing a mass exodus!!

HIDE YOUR KIDS, HIDE YOUR WIFE

 

[LinasK]

This just in: Florida is experiencing a mass exodus!!

HIDE YOUR KIDS, HIDE YOUR WIFE

Sorry, I'd personally befriend Ryan if I was younger. He seems very nice and credible to me.

 

[LinasK]

Your right Apples & Oranges!!!
Ferguson & Friend admitted to being in the area the crime occurred (no cell pinging necessary), they admitted to Mallary they beat someone down that night, Shawna the janitor saw 2 males behaving suspiciously enough she went to get a co-worker. Then Erickson, you know, the one with a conscience, admits that him and Ferguson killed Kent. Hopefully they get the evidence needed to try and convict Ferguson again

Again you are right apples and oranges

??? Erickson admitted to a dream 2 years after the fact that he thinks they did it, not that he knows it, and he did NOT know the simple details of the case, like the murder weapon and there is zero solid proof that they were in that parking lot, while a witness, who was not called to testify saw them drive away from the bar going home.

 

[Mitch1]

Sorry, I'd personally befriend Ryan if I was younger. He seems very nice and credible to me.

I have always told my daughter-Don't befriend a guy who doesn't show empathy or.... owns a wood chipper

 

[Mitch1]

??? Erickson admitted to a dream 2 years after the fact that he thinks they did it, not that he knows it, and he did NOT know the simple details of the case, like the murder weapon and there is zero solid proof that they were in that parking lot, while a witness, who was not called to testify saw them drive away from the bar going home.

Erickson couldn't hold in the guilt of what they had done and to get it off his chest he told friends about "a dream" he had, claiming it was a dream probably to distance himself in his mind from what they did. He knew details of the case, however he wasn't quite ready for the consequences and intentionally gave the interrogators the wrong answers-hoping they would think, hey, maybe they didn't kill Kent. There is plenty of evidence of that proves they committed this crime and no amount of campaigning for Ryan can change that

 

[LinasK]

Erickson couldn't hold in the guilt of what they had done and to get it off his chest he told friends about "a dream" he had, claiming it was a dream probably to distance himself in his mind from what they did. He knew details of the case, however he wasn't quite ready for the consequences and intentionally gave the interrogators the wrong answers-hoping they would think, hey, maybe they didn't kill Kent. There is plenty of evidence of that proves they committed this crime and no amount of campaigning for Ryan can change that

I saw the video- they fed him the details that Kent was strangled with his own belt after he was beaten. Chuck did NOT know this. Where is that "plenty of evidence"??? If that were true, Ryan's conviction would not have been vacated.

 

[Mitch1]

I saw the video- they fed him the details that Kent was strangled with his own belt after he was beaten. Chuck did NOT know this. Where is that "plenty of evidence"??? If that were true, Ryan's conviction would not have been vacated.

Loads of Evidence: Ferguson & Friend admitted to being in the area the crime occurred (no cell pinging necessary), they admitted to Mallary they beat someone down that night (and just so happens someone was beat down that night), Shawna the janitor saw 2 males behaving suspiciously enough (by Kent's vehicle) she went to get a co-worker. Then Erickson, you know, the one with a conscience, admits that him and Ferguson killed Kent. Hopefully they get the evidence needed to try and convict Ferguson again

Yep he was vacated(he can and hopefully will be tried and convicted again), he was NOT exonerated

Yeah I saw the video as well, seems you would like people to think this is a false or coerced confession-Its's NOT, no one coerced him to tell his friends what they had done. He just played dumb with the police-he wasn't ready to go jail, he only told his friends to get it off his chest!

 

[jggordo]

I don't understand that Ryan's or Chuck's alibi is that they were at the bar. In so much that it was 2001, they were both 17. How were they in a club 4 blocks from the police station at that age? At this point I don't believe Ryan is just totally not guilty. In his trial his behavior was that of a "punk". The jurors got that as well. It might be understandable that someone slightly younger than 21 might get in to a club. But barely 17, CMON. and both of them?

 

[Madeleine74]

If you knew the details of the case you'd have seen or heard Ryan's sister tell how she got them into the bar. College town, college bar, easy peasy to get in.

 

[marlalouise]

Much more evidence points to the last person who said he spoke to Heitholt than to anyone else.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

 

[jggordo]

If you knew the details of the case you'd have seen or heard Ryan's sister tell how she got them into the bar. College town, college bar, easy peasy to get in.

I live in Columbia so I'm aware of the details of the case. Of course the sister is going to say that. If you could help your brother not go to jail you would too. But I know the guys who owned that bar at that time. Because it was Halloween night there was extra security checking IDs and such due to costumes etc.. Those 17 year old kids were not inside that club. Columbia did not have as many bars at that time. The owners do not put their licenses and business on the line to serve kids that young. And it is because it is a college town.

 

[Madeleine74]

jggordo, if you have evidence then you need to take it to the police. Otherwise it's just spitting in the wind and guessing and speculating and creating rumors.

I prefer not to do that and I like to use verified facts and unimpeached testimony.

As of right now, Ryan is not guilty and is not a convicted felon. And for that I am glad because I've not seen any evidence linking him to the Heitholt murder.

 

[Mitch1]

Yeah I like "verified facts" and "unimpeached testimony" too. You know what I also like, uncoerced confessions-which Ryan and Erikson supplied.

Correction-Ryan isn't a convicted murderer-that does not mean he isn't guilty

I hope they retry him and while there at it, I wish they would figure out a way to prosecute his parents for obstruction of justice!

 

[LinasK]

I don't understand that Ryan's or Chuck's alibi is that they were at the bar. In so much that it was 2001, they were both 17. How were they in a club 4 blocks from the police station at that age? At this point I don't believe Ryan is just totally not guilty. In his trial his behavior was that of a "punk". The jurors got that as well. It might be understandable that someone slightly younger than 21 might get in to a club. But barely 17, CMON. and both of them?

His sister, who was older, got them in. Getting into a bar under age/acting like a "punk" does not make you a murderer. Heck I got into a bar and got drinks when I was 17- I was in college and it was a college town. I didn't even have fake ID.

 

[LinasK]

I live in Columbia so I'm aware of the details of the case. Of course the sister is going to say that. If you could help your brother not go to jail you would too. But I know the guys who owned that bar at that time. Because it was Halloween night there was extra security checking IDs and such due to costumes etc.. Those 17 year old kids were not inside that club. Columbia did not have as many bars at that time. The owners do not put their licenses and business on the line to serve kids that young. And it is because it is a college town.

Yeah they do, when you have servers that don't check. I know because I did it in college in 1978, when I was still 17 with a friend of mine.

 

[LinasK]

Yeah I like "verified facts" and "unimpeached testimony" too. You know what I also like, uncoerced confessions-which Ryan and Erikson supplied.

Correction-Ryan isn't a convicted murderer-that does not mean he isn't guilty

I hope they retry him and while there at it, I wish they would figure out a way to prosecute his parents for obstruction of justice!

Wrong- Ryan did NOT confess, and you miss that Erikson's confession was false. There is zero DNA evidence or otherwise to back it up. Ryan won't be retried.

 

[Mitch1]

Wrong- Ryan did NOT confess, and you miss that Erikson's confession was false. There is zero DNA evidence or otherwise to back it up. Ryan won't be retried.

Oh yes Ryan did-he confessed that Erickson and himself were at the club that night and his sister backs up this claim---No one coerced this out of them

Erickson confessed to Mallary that night that Ryan and him "beat someone down". He also told Mallory that night he was freaked out by what they had done and didn't know what to do.----No one coerced that out of him

Erickson's conscience gets the best of him and after 2 years of dealing with the guilt of what they had done, tells a friend at a party about "the dream" he had, describing it as a dream to distance himself in his mind from what they had done---Again no one coerced that out of him


What you are missing is that recanting a confession is not the same thing as a false confession, and the confessions above aren't coerced-if that is why you are calling them false. There is no DNA evidence, but there is PLENTY of other evidence that proves they are GUILTY

 

[LinasK]

Oh yes Ryan did-he confessed that Erickson and himself were at the club that night and his sister backs up this claim---No one coerced this out of them

Erickson confessed to Mallary that night that Ryan and him "beat someone down". He also told Mallory that night he was freaked out by what they had done and didn't know what to do.----No one coerced that out of him

Erickson's conscience gets the best of him and after 2 years of dealing with the guilt of what they had done, tells a friend at a party about "the dream" he had, describing it as a dream to distance himself in his mind from what they had done---Again no one coerced that out of him


What you are missing is that recanting a confession is not the same thing as a false confession, and the confessions above aren't coerced-if that is why you are calling them false. There is no DNA evidence, but there is PLENTY of other evidence that proves they are GUILTY

1) Having been at the club is no proof of murder. Noone disputes that they were at the club. This is NOT a confession of murder. 2) Who is Mallary?
3) What other evidence is there than a confession that is false because they were not in the newspaper parking lot??? Erickson did not know how Kent died. He was fed that detail by LE.
The confession that was recanted is that of the janitor who claimed he saw Ryan and now says it wasn't them.

 

[jggordo]

Glad that Ryan has moved or is from Columbia. He can possibly move on with his life. That possibility is better that way. The prospect that he is somehow a celebrity in the shadow of a tragedy that remains unresolved is just not right. It is truly how the media can make a horrible tragedy into some sort of success story where nobody wins. At the end of the day Mr. Heitholt was the true victim here...not Ryan Ferguson.