Martin MacNeill claims witness lied, wants murder conviction thrown out

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Mugabe ACWORTH, GA
    Jan. 3, 2014 7:12 a.m.

    I think that the defense attorney has a valid reason to ask that the verdict be thrown out. The Prosecuting attorney did say that no deal was made with the inmates, in exchange for their testimony, but that wasn't the case. In fact, it was a lie.

    I believe that McNeill will be cleared of the charges and the state will have to pay a hefty settlement to avoid a suit.

  • Old Navy Provo, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 11:03 p.m.

    This is nothing more than a delay tactic by the defense.

  • Swimmer Honeyville, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 10:09 p.m.

    The brain wave lie detector tests have not been shown to be any more accurate than the standard polygraph test. The polygraph test has been shown to be inherently unreliable because it often finds people who are telling the truth to be liars.

    The brain wave lie detector has the opposite problem. It often finds liars to be telling the truth. Anyone who would submit to either type of test is nuts. Both of these methods have been found to be very unreliable and that is why the courts reject them.

  • caleb in new york Glen Cove, NY
    Jan. 2, 2014 7:50 p.m.

    i find the McNeil's note professing his innocence to be totally fishy. That he is willing to kill himself shows a disrespect for life that is consistent with a person willing to kill someone else. If he were innocent and was disappointed with the jury's decision, murdering (himself, i.e. suicide) would not be his reaction.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 6:21 p.m.

    Putting convicted criminals and jailhouse snitches on the witness stand has always been problematic. It to easy to question their motives. Are they telling the truth or lying for their own personal get out of jail card. Just a thought.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 4:42 p.m.

    re Darrel
    Eagle Mountain, UT

    "Your brain wave lie detector would be inadmissable as it would rely on violating the 5th ammendment rights of the accused to not testify against themselves".

    Yes it would be inadmissible, but so what? It wouldn't need to be admissible for it to ensure that no innocent people are convicted. If anyone passes it, they wouldn't be prosecuted. I would also propose a law that if the defendant passed this test, and was still prosecuted, the defendant could admit this as evidence if they want to.


    On and yes, if he killed his wife is the only thing that untimately matters. Perhaps not in our imperfect system of justice as it exists now, but hopefully in time we will continue our centuries long march of improvement the justice system and then factual innocence (not counting the defendant being insane or a situation that requires jury nullification due to the law being a bad law) will be the only thing that matters.

  • Shawnm750 West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 2:33 p.m.

    @cjb - Well if it's on Google then it MUST be true...

    Even if they are the most reliable, they obviously aren't widespread, and they're probably very expensive. But since regular polygraphs aren't all that reliable, I'm betting that neuro-based polygraphs won't be adopted very soon.

  • ute alumni SLC, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 2:14 p.m.

    mcneil calling someone a liar. that is beautiful.

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 2:10 p.m.


    There is only one thing that matters, did he murder his wife ?


    In a perfect world, that would be true. Sadly, there is much more at play. Each citizen is guaranteed a fair trial, even someone as disgusting as a murderer. But only in guaranteeing them their rights are our rights secure.

    One does not have to prove innocence, the burden of proof lies with the State. All one has to do is provide doubt. If removing this testimony would create doubt, our Constitution stipulates the conviction be removed.

    Your brain wave lie detector would be inadmissable as it would rely on violating the 5th ammendment rights of the accused to not testify against themselves; and a refusal to take the test would be/could be seen as an admission of guilt. If one truly believed their innocence, or believed it enough to cast doubt, the test would not be unbeatable.

  • md Cache, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 1:47 p.m.

    They shouldn't have prevented him from suicide. This will never end, as long as these attorneys continue to be able to bill the state for every appeal.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 1:22 p.m.

    There is only one thing that matters, did he murder his wife ?

    Law enforcement should use the brain wave based lie detectors which are proven to be unbeatable. Offer all people about to be prosecuted a chance to prove they are innocent. If they pass, they will not be prosecuted.

    How is it that I can Google 'brain wave lie detector' and read about it and how unbeatable it is, yet I never hear of its use anywhere? It could be used to empty the prisons of innocent people, it could be used to determine who is a terrorist and who isn't at airports.

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    Jan. 2, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    A little late for that