GUILTY WI - Barbara Kendhammer, 46, dies in staged accident, Hamilton, 16 Sept 2016 *Appeal denied*

New Posts

What made this "Staged" as the thread's title indicates? A really sad case with no victories for anyone.

Satch
 
Satch said:
What made this "Staged" as the thread's title indicates? A really sad case with no victories for anyone.

Satch
Click to expand...

Briefly, Barbara did not die as a result of being impaled, as TK alleged, but instead was murdered and her body posed in the car to look as if she'd been impaled.
 
I just finished watching the whole trial. While I felt he was guilty, I was almost expecting a not guilty verdict. I thought the jurors might succumb to the stories of the perfect relationship by various family members and friends, and their presence in the court room.

But... it appears they were paying attention to the details. The family is going to really struggle coming to terms with this. It will take years, if not decades.
 
Just reading about this case for the first time today.

Due to the randomness of what could happen to a windshield if debri fell off the back of a truck I would think the windshield would have infinite number of possibilities in how it may have looked. So I would be interested in learning what evidence was shown about the condition of the car and victim that helped them decide this was a definite setup.

For example if something fell off a truck and struck the windshield then other things off the same truck may have struck the windshield too right at the same about time. So I would think it would be almost impossible to claim a windshield would have to look a certain way.

I guess I need to dig into this case to see what the jury saw.
 
Hatfield said:
Just reading about this case for the first time today.

Due to the randomness of what could happen to a windshield if debri fell off the back of a truck I would think the windshield would have infinite number of possibilities in how it may have looked. So I would be interested in learning what evidence was shown about the condition of the car and victim that helped them decide this was a definite setup.

For example if something fell off a truck and struck the windshield then other things off the same truck may have struck the windshield too right at the same about time. So I would think it would be almost impossible to claim a windshield would have to look a certain way.

I guess I need to dig into this case to see what the jury saw.
Click to expand...

I can't find it now, but I remember reading that her injuries were not consistent with having a pipe come through the windscreen. If there were other objects which damaged the windscreen, they would have been found on the road.
 
The defendant described how the pipe allegedly came through the windshield in great detail to the cops after the incident.

The evidence presented in court of the damage to the windshield and the injuries to Barbara are totally inconsistent to his story. Even a third grader could tell they do not match up at all.
 
Well, I'm just catching up on this case. It's both fascinating and devastating.

Thanks to all for your patience!
(And my hugs to any family or other loved ones.)
 
I watched the whole trial and I agree with the jury.

The defendant lied to the police multiple times, tried to get others to be his alibi/cover for him, her injuries weren't consistent with his story (medical examiner confirms this and so do the autopsy photos), on the stand he tried to convince everyone- not relay the information of what happened that day, the lame story he told doesn't hold up.
 
I haven't quite made it through watching the entire trial, but the "expert" witness for the defence covering analysis of the victim's injuries was totally ripped to shreds. Boy he was an embarrassing witness! If you get a chance to watch it, Steven (with a "v", because we couldn't afford a "ph") Cook was the first witness on day 6.
 
Key points in the case where Todd's story doesn't make sense:

The story about going to get a truck to fix the windshield:
- the person (Justin) says he didn't ask him to and didn't expect him to pick up a vehicle
- Todd hadn't spoken to Justin in over a month; the only conversation that had even broached on windshields had been 4 months prior
- Todd didn't know where the vehicle was that he was going to pick up (he was vague about where and changed his story!!)

The timing of the trip to get the truck:
- Todd was going to be too late for work so would have to call in sick
- Barb would be late for work and hadn't called in to say so. She always called in if late.
- the family was heading straight to camping after work and had to get ready. When were they going to replace the windshield? Why was that such an urgent matter on such a busy day?
- Barb called her mother around 7:45am each weekday. She didn't call her the morning of the "accident".

The accident:
- occurred on a flat, straight stretch of road. What would have suddenly have cause something to fly off the back of the truck on an angle that would carry it straight toward the passenger side of the Kendhammer's vehicle?
- no vehicle matching the description was seen on video heading down that road around the time of the accident.
- Todd originally thought it was a bird. How could a long pipe, travelling at an angle, look like a bird?
- Todd said he lunged at the object as it was coming to/through the windshield. It was his left hand that suffered the most damage, but Todd is right handed and his right hand would have been closest and most natural to reach out.
- Todd didn't pull over to the side of the road. Instead he turned up a smaller road and ultimately ended up in a ditch. Why would he turn up that road? (There is very little traffic on that road and they would be much less likely to be noticed. With the car backed into the ditch, Barb's body was blocked from view from the larger road.)
- a car drove along the small road and saw the car in the ditch, but didn't see anyone around the vehicle. (Where were they?) Todd said no vehicles passed by before the EMS arrived.
- A pipe travelling at that speed would "impale" someone or something, or else continue right through the vehicle.
- BK didn't have wounds consistent with a pipe coming through the windshield. She had lacerations on the back of her head that were more serious than injuries on the front of her head.
- Todd had what appeared to be scratch marks on both sides of his neck and on his chest. Todd's DNA was found under Barb's nails.


There are lots more inconsistencies, but it's difficult to imagine that he didn't kill her.
One thing that raised a red flag for me was that he said they were never apart. That they spend all of their time together (other than during work). He said that he would go on an annual deer hunt weekend with relatives, but would drive home each night to eat with Barb before heading back to the camp. No one else went home to their spouses. This just sounds a little over the top controlling or lacking in trust.

I'm sorry that their children have had to go through this.
 
It never fails to amaze me the lies people can tell and continue to tell . RIP Barbara
 
Hatfield said:
Just reading about this case for the first time today.

Due to the randomness of what could happen to a windshield if debri fell off the back of a truck I would think the windshield would have infinite number of possibilities in how it may have looked. So I would be interested in learning what evidence was shown about the condition of the car and victim that helped them decide this was a definite setup.

For example if something fell off a truck and struck the windshield then other things off the same truck may have struck the windshield too right at the same about time. So I would think it would be almost impossible to claim a windshield would have to look a certain way.

I guess I need to dig into this case to see what the jury saw.
Click to expand...

I just finished watching the entire trial. And while I wanted for Todd to be innocent there were so many things that didn't add up. It is my opinion that Todd was so well liked through her family that she felt she couldn't ever speak up about what was really going on. A few things that were subtitles in the hearing was that he had a spending problem and a problem with interacting with people within his job as he changed jobs several times. He loved buying "toys". It seemed as though they were able to financially cover for them as Barbara handled the financing. However there was a few bills totaling several thousand dollars that when she brought them up to him via text message she seemed unaware they existed or thought they had been previously dealt with.

It is also my opinion that the issue of these bills and him not disclosing that he was switching or being switched to the night shift at work as well as his meager paycheck (someone who was supposed to make 87k year had a check of a little more than 600.00) was what began an unfortunate set of events to where he snapped when confronted.
 
After having watched the entire trial, I think it was the lies and lack of information that Todd gave that sealed the deal with his jury. Todd had a lot of I don't know in his story and I don't care how much stress you are under you will remember more details than he did. Also the crazy theories his expert witnesses gave didn't cut it with me. I believed the ME as she has more experience.

I think the jury had made up their minds before the defense put on their case. I also believe that Todd snapped over an argument over the bills and lack of money when confronted by Barb. jmo

I wonder if he was going to take her to work and then when they went to the neighbors something started there or maybe before that and finished her off or staged it on the side road. Just speculating

moo imo
 
During the verdict, who was the blonde female sitting behind the defendant and to the left of the daughter and son-in-law? She’s wearing a grey sweater and wearing glasses. She kept crying even before the verdict, and then she snapped at the woman behind her, saying “take him”. She seems like a violent person. Also, they talked about the family acting violent towards the media.
The way the family portrayed themselves and the way they acted here doesn’t match up.
 
bennevis said:
wow, ive only just joined but this site is real thorough.
Click to expand...

Welcome bennevis!
There is lots to explore here...cases followed by only a few; cases that are followed by a horde and moving so fast it's hard to keep up; cold cases that need a new eye; cases in your region; cases in other countries.

:Welcome1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 121 more.
Total: 4,433 (members: 122, guests: 4,311)

Online statistics

Members online
122
Guests online
4,311
Total visitors
4,433
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,404
Messages
17,968,455
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top