1.30.2014

The Denton "No Body" Murder Case Defendant Has Been Released




He sat three years in prison before the court of appeals had the gut to overturn a case -- a case which drove me nuts. Amazingly, he's only on bond and will have to wear an ankle monitor because the Denton County D.A.'s office has indicated it will appeal. Incredible.

And how much money do you think this has cost the taxpayers? Look at this first footnote in the opinion overturning the conviction:


(The "reporter's record" is what you would commonly refer to as the transcript.)

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

This guy was excellent at hiding a body, I gotta give him that.

Anonymous said...

^^^^^

no kidding....mad skills.

Anonymous said...

Well written opinion, this is a nice excerpt:

Here, there is no body;there is no evidence that Charles had a mistress or remarried after Kathy‘s disappearance;
there is no evidence of staging a crime scene; there is no evidence that Charles possessed the type of weapon used in the murder; and although Charles appeared calm,
unlike Temple, he did not claim that he had just discovered his wife murdered.
Further, Charles did not
threaten witnesses or tell them to keep their mouths shut. Charles cooperated with police, gave consent to search to anyone who asked to search his property,
and made oral and written statements to anyone who asked him for an oral or written statement.

Anonymous said...

4:11 Tell me this, how the heck do they know he didn't posses the type of weapon used in the murder if they never found the body? They either have a body, know exaclty how she was killed and with what, or this guy doesn't own a knife, gun, bat, baton, hammer, screwdriver, chainsaw or any object whatsoever that could be used to kill someone.

DF Richard "Racehorse" Head said...

GUILTY!

Anonymous said...

4:45

Simple.

Without a body, you cannot determine cause of death. Without knowing the cause of death, the cause of the death cannot be determined.

Anonymous said...

4:45

Take a look around your garage, kitchen or even under your kitchen sink. Got anything there that could kill a human?

Almost every household has something that could be used to kill another human being.

Anonymous said...

445: the State has the burden of proof. They must prove their case. There is no evidence of any murder weapon.

Anonymous said...

7:10 and 7:19 are a couple of mouth breathers. Reading comprehension is a skill that few on this blog have mastered.

The "well written" opinion stated that he didn't possess the type of weapon used in the murder. Without a body we don't even know there was a murder. That was my point. The way it was written implies that they know what killed her.

Anonymous said...

Thank God another slick crafty murderer is free!

Anonymous said...

Reading the entire appellate opinion shows how hard the DA worked to get a conviction at any cost.
The bigger problem is that her multiple boyfriends were hardly investigated. It appears as if she had someone pick her up close to Charles' home. Left her car at Charles driveway. And unfortunately for Kathy, whomever picked her up, did away with her. Charles consented to every single search and entertained every request for investigator interviews. He had nothing to hide, including her body. There's no way that a guy that never leaves Denton/Cooke county could have covered every trace of a murdered body.

Anonymous said...

9:38

You may want to reread these sections, slower this time.

"That is, there is no body, no murder weapon, no witnesses, and no blood or DNA evidence; there are no fibers or hairs or any type of forensic evidence establishing that a murder occurred or linking Charles to a murder; and there is no confession or directly incriminatory statement by Charles.

Ranger Murphree conceded that Kathy had never been found and that no murder weapon had ever been located.

The record before us likewise contains no evidence that a deadly weapon was used: no deadly-weapon facts exist from which the jury could infer Charles‘s intent. Accord Cavazos, 382 S.W.3d at 384. And Kathy‘s body has never been found and no autopsy has been performed, so no evidence exists concerning the types of injuries purportedly inflicted upon Kathy from which the jury could infer Charles‘s intent.

Here, although an inference exists that Kathy is dead, there is no evidence that her death was a murder––there is no body, no murder weapon, no witnesses, no blood or DNA evidence; there are no fibers, hairs, or any type of forensic evidence establishing that a murder occurred; and there is no confession or directly incriminatory statement by Charles."

Anonymous said...

11:07 Read the excerpt below over and over and let it sink in. Read it fast, read it slow, I don't f'ng care. Then get back to me on what the purpose of this statement was.

"no evidence that Charles possessed the type of weapon used in the murder"

Again, you can't match a murder weapon to a body you don't have. Every single item owned by Stobaugh could have been a murder weapon.

Anonymous said...

11:31, the excerpt that was posted above was from a portion of the opinion that was comparing this case to a prior case. The court was merely pointing out that, unlike the case used for comparison, here, there was no evidence of possession of a (or any) type of murder weapon.

Anonymous said...

12:30 Parts of the opinion were used in comparison to a prior case, but the excerpt above was speaking directly about the defendent in this case in regards to the murder weapon.

You can't know whether or not he possesed the murder weapon until you find her body. I am only speaking on this point alone, and not any of the other comparisons between the "Charles" and "Temple" cases.

Anonymous said...

If the treatment of that man by our joke of a justice system doesn't scare the Hell out of you, well- that scares the Hell out of me.

Anonymous said...

Do I think that he did it? Sure.

But we need to NOT be convicting and punishing people for crimes that we can't adequately prove up.

I'm not saying that [former] Ranger Murphee did anything wrong-- he put forward to the D.A. the evidence that he had, and the D.A. ran with what they had. But in the end, it wasn't there, adequate to prove up a murder.

"If 'everybody knows' such-and-such, then it ain't so, by at least ten thousand to one."
--"Notebooks of Lazarus Long", Time Enough For Love