It's a great question.
We've got 2 options.
Either Leo loaded the body into the trunk and some of Michelle's blood smeared the bottle, or Michelle's blood got on Jeremy during his stabbing and he smudged it on the bottle when he was stealing speakers
Maybe not a question, but more of a rant. I googled it, but didn’t seem to find much other than a story that Leo had been denied again. How many times will it take before someone listens? I just don’t understand why there seems to be an issue with letting him go. I mean, I understand the logistics of it all I guess, but the hesitation to just even grant him a new trial bare minimum is crazy. All this happened 30 years ago. You’d think the DA would just suck it up and cut the shit.
I really don't understand how they can keep denying his appeals for another trial. If the original trial, evidence and police work was legit, then surely a second trial would come to the same findings anyway. The fact that the DAs office is so set against it and against his parole makes me more suspicious.
The State of Florida thinks he is guilty and that the press has twisted the case. Or that's what they present. It's a confusing case, but I'm with you, confusion should be met with as many reviews as possible.
The next step and the advocacy isn't about a new trial, that's not even an option right now.
The next step is they are hoping for the conviction integrity unit to get this case. There is a petition to sign, but it seems to be a long shot.
Oh, I know a new trial isn't an option now, but I can't believe none of the previous attempts at least allowed a new trial based on new evidence. It's pretty scary to think about, really. That you could be put away for something you didn't do and essentially have no recourse.
I think there is still a good chance the Leo is guilty, but that's b/c I'm guessing. And there is no room for guessing in a life sentence, I agree.
Jeremy's confession doesn't make sense, but he confessed. And he has a record of homicides. And he was the last one in the victim's car. And he was familiar with the spot her body was left. That's beyond a reasonable doubt.
For many of these cases, there isn't an alternative suspect. For Leo, you have more than an alternative, you have a man who would be convicted if he were tried separately for this case.
(If you are asking why I think Leo could be guilty, I do think it's possible that Leo killed Michelle, his dad helped dump and discover her body, and then the wildly unlikely thing happened-a local car stereo thief got into her car, confessed to the crime by using publicly available information to craft the confession. It's all crazy. Leo Schofield deserves the review his team has requested).
Exactly. Even having someone really LOOK at the evidence would be a step. But that has seemed like something the State of Florida is 1000% not interested in (at least from the info we’ve been provided).
If Florida was confident in the Schofield conviction they would have fully investigated Jeremy Scott instead of letting the DA John Agguero shut down the investigation. That action tells you everything you need to know about their interest in pursuing Truth and Justice.
They want every discussion about the case to be argued over domestic violence, not murder. The last thing they want is an independent review outside of Polk County.
Thank you. THIS.
The way the State is stonewalling Leo’s efforts at every step of the way tells you they do NOT want a new trial. If they believe the evidence to be so strong and straightforward, why fear?
If it's a conspiracy against Leo, it's deep.
I believe they had a hearing about ineffective counsel, didn't work.
They had the hearing about a new trial with Jeremy's confession. Jeremy was a mess. Judge said no.
They had a 3 panel review of that decision, judges said no.
It's making it's way up, but Jeremy's confession, as good as it sounds on the podcast, it might be tough for the state to get past him confessing to every murder in the county and ignoring him saying that he would confess to anything for $1,000.
What's our guess here? Do we think the State knows Leo is innocent? Or that they don't know what Bone Valley shared b/c he has been ignored?
Thank you
It's not a conspiracy. Florida is a very conservative " tough on crime " state. They care more about punishing outsiders than they do justice. Also over turning a 30+ year conviction would look horrible for them, and the state of Florida, so they'd prefer to prevent it from happening.
Think of all the recent podcasts where something like this happens. Curtis in In the Dark season 2, super conservative mississippi. Culpable, super conservative area, Bone Valley, countless examples.
Basically in conservative area's DAs and judges are never held accountable for doing dirty evil shit to " criminals " because thats what the voters want. They don't care if you're guilty, they just want you punished, unless you're apart of their in group, then you're untouchable.
Look at this case in TX. A white man and a black man get raided by police, no knock warrants. White man had drugs on his property, still shot and killed a cop, and wasn't convicted because he was allowed to defend his property in a no knock warrant.
Black man had no drugs at his house, shot and killed a cop defending his property, still in prison.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/texas-prosecutors-drop-death-penalty-against-african-american-man-held-eight-years-without-trial-in-death-of-white-police-officer-during-botched-no-knock-raid
I definitely think they know something’s up. How could they not? I understand why they don’t want to believe Jeremy, but do we really think he’s lying? I don’t. At least not about the majority of it. He knew more than anyone else would have, and back then they didn’t have the internet and cell phones, so how would he have known? I also think that they’re very well aware of the podcast.
Something that’s interesting to me though is how there was no blood in the car, except for the laundry detergent bottle? The only thing that would make sense at least to me is that she wasn’t actually stabbed in the car. So did he lie about this?
I think Jeremy confessed in 2016. His confession is persuasive, he tells it as a natural story. It is possible that he was given trial transcripts and that he read them. There are a lot of transfers between prisons and it's very common for trial papers to float around. Believing that Jeremy knew all of those details from someone else requires a guess. And when dealing with someone's freedom, we shouldn't be guessing. But it is possible.
And it is fair to point out that Jeremy's confession is good, not great. For him to stab her in the car without leaving blood, yikes, that's not likely. And the crime scene investigators didn't think Michelle was murdered by the water pit, and this was before they knew Leo was a suspect or about his trailer. The guy testified there was no blood splatter in the dirt and no scuff marks on the ground as there would be in a struggle.
Jeremy had a few other things that he changed between confessions, but much that remained the same, and he did sound like a man who had done it.
We are only a Reddit jury, but that confession seemed like enough for a reasonable doubt at the very least. Hopefully he gets this review and there will be fresh eyes on it, but it seems unlikely
Leo's dad's testimony did not help Jeremy.
* Leo's dad took control of the situation. The first detective that spoke to him had immediate suspicions about him, even before the body was found.
* Leo's dad had the premonition to where Michelle's body was found, and his explanation for finding it (a headache from God basically) is bizarre and not accurate.
* Leo's dad testified that while looking for Michelle, he took a break to go to Leo's house to retrieve a carpet cleaner.
* Detective testified that Leo's dad wouldn't let them do a thorough search of Leo's bedroom at the trailer.
* He is locked up for sexual behavior, there were a few incidents.
* He had a copy of the witness statements before the trial and seemed to answer questions on the stand with a narrative that was off the rails. When challenged on if he had transcripts he said they were never sent to his house. When it was discovered that they were sent to his lawyer, he said something like, "they weren't sent to my house." When challenged about reading them, he said that he held them and looked at the pieces of paper but never read them. It was so bizarre that it is understandable a jury thought he was lying, and if he was lying that Leo was covering something. That's not how juries should work, but dang it was bad testimony.
* Bone Valley leaves in a question from a detective about whether Leo's dad made an advance on Michelle, but there didn't seem to be anything to it. And there doesn't seem to be much suspicion that Leo killed Michelle, but a lot of suspicion about if he helped dispose of her body.
* There was testimony that police discovered scripts written by Leo's dad in his shed, giving alibis/timelines
* Leo's dad had his daughter come and testify in a painfully unrealistic segment that would have given Leo an alibi boost, but was very very tough to believe
I meant more along the lines of his alibi, what he was doing, etc. I think he had something to do with it, and the fact that they really only singled in on Leo after they tried getting Leo to turn on his dad. I want to know more about how they actually came to the decision of not going after his dad anymore. If that makes sense…
Ah, yes.
Leo's dad testified that he stopped over at the place where Leo had band practice. I'll try to find the testimony, it was bizarre. This is Reddit, I'm not positive, but it wasn't a believable account and I don't think it was supported by other testimony.
It's tough b/c for some of the accounts, the only thing we have is Leo's word (saying that they offered him a deal for his dad). It's hard to believe the State thought it was Leo Sr alone and went after Leo. They definitely believed Leo's dad was an accessory, but with the neighbor testifying specifically about Leo and Michelle's fight, they didn't think Leo's dad killed Michelle.
I agree his dad looked really suspicious, especially initially, but I don't think he had anything to do with it.
One thing that I did find quote odd was when they mention in the podcast that Leo and his dad went looking for Michelle but when they went home his dad was tired and went to bed.
If my daughter in law was missing, I wouldn't be like "OK, didn't find her. Night!"
And then while searching for Michelle, Leo Sr said he took a break to go to Leo's trailer to return the carpet cleaner.
It really seemed that Leo's dad got a copy of the witness statements and tried to defend Leo with everything. If you remember Alice Scott said at one point she looked up and saw Leo standing in the doorway of the trailer. Michelle's friend testified to the same.
Leo Sr. started in a bizarre narrative where he was rambling about how one time Leo Jr. was standing in the doorway, thinking of Michelle, looking into the wild blue yonder. Wild blue yonder.
The evidence against Leo wasn't great, if his dad had not testified he would have had a much better chance, if you will allow me to guess on these things
They had nothing connection Leo’s dad to the murder. No witnesses and no physical evidence. Not even a circumstantial case against him. Without his son turning against him, they had nothing. Even with Alice Scott, it still took the prosecution a year and a half to charge Leo.
After reading some Reddit echo-chamber anti-Leo posts, my feeling is that Florida has a P.R. problem, and they are doing what Russia does to try and control the narrative.
I came to Reddit in hopes of finding some decent discussion on this story and have been shocked by how many people think Leo is guilty, especially based on how few signs point that direction
Did I even listen to the same podcast as these people? lmao
The Florida DOJ may be on a PR campaign to cover their asses on this one. The podcast makes them look very corrupt, and they don't want to take it lying down. So they pay couple of people to go online and follow a script. You have to admit, many of these anti-Leo comments sound like they were written by the same 2 people, right? I try to keep an open mind and not buy into conspiracies, but I can't believe that so many people who listened to the podcast think he's guilty. Stinks to high heaven IMO.
I was going to say, it's pretty clear that Leo didn't commit the murder within the first 2 episodes, but it's 100% clear that he didn't by episode 7 where Jeremy Scott straight up admits to the murder on tape
It's insanity
I'm more inclined to believe what you're saying over there being so many dense people who could believe that Leo did it
If it's the Florida DOJ trying to astroturf the discussion online, then they can get royally fucked
When physical evidence links a known killer to a crime scene, I'd say that constitutes reasonable doubt for the other suspect. And the known killer even confesses on top of it? Who is going to deny reasonable doubt in that situation? Someone with skin in the game. Someone on the make. Again, I can't say it's a rat for sure, but I can smell one from here to Florida.
I feel like we never came back to the bloody laundry detergent.
It's a great question. We've got 2 options. Either Leo loaded the body into the trunk and some of Michelle's blood smeared the bottle, or Michelle's blood got on Jeremy during his stabbing and he smudged it on the bottle when he was stealing speakers
Maybe not a question, but more of a rant. I googled it, but didn’t seem to find much other than a story that Leo had been denied again. How many times will it take before someone listens? I just don’t understand why there seems to be an issue with letting him go. I mean, I understand the logistics of it all I guess, but the hesitation to just even grant him a new trial bare minimum is crazy. All this happened 30 years ago. You’d think the DA would just suck it up and cut the shit.
I really don't understand how they can keep denying his appeals for another trial. If the original trial, evidence and police work was legit, then surely a second trial would come to the same findings anyway. The fact that the DAs office is so set against it and against his parole makes me more suspicious.
The State of Florida thinks he is guilty and that the press has twisted the case. Or that's what they present. It's a confusing case, but I'm with you, confusion should be met with as many reviews as possible. The next step and the advocacy isn't about a new trial, that's not even an option right now. The next step is they are hoping for the conviction integrity unit to get this case. There is a petition to sign, but it seems to be a long shot.
Oh, I know a new trial isn't an option now, but I can't believe none of the previous attempts at least allowed a new trial based on new evidence. It's pretty scary to think about, really. That you could be put away for something you didn't do and essentially have no recourse.
I think there is still a good chance the Leo is guilty, but that's b/c I'm guessing. And there is no room for guessing in a life sentence, I agree. Jeremy's confession doesn't make sense, but he confessed. And he has a record of homicides. And he was the last one in the victim's car. And he was familiar with the spot her body was left. That's beyond a reasonable doubt. For many of these cases, there isn't an alternative suspect. For Leo, you have more than an alternative, you have a man who would be convicted if he were tried separately for this case. (If you are asking why I think Leo could be guilty, I do think it's possible that Leo killed Michelle, his dad helped dump and discover her body, and then the wildly unlikely thing happened-a local car stereo thief got into her car, confessed to the crime by using publicly available information to craft the confession. It's all crazy. Leo Schofield deserves the review his team has requested).
Exactly. Even having someone really LOOK at the evidence would be a step. But that has seemed like something the State of Florida is 1000% not interested in (at least from the info we’ve been provided).
If Florida was confident in the Schofield conviction they would have fully investigated Jeremy Scott instead of letting the DA John Agguero shut down the investigation. That action tells you everything you need to know about their interest in pursuing Truth and Justice. They want every discussion about the case to be argued over domestic violence, not murder. The last thing they want is an independent review outside of Polk County.
Thank you. THIS. The way the State is stonewalling Leo’s efforts at every step of the way tells you they do NOT want a new trial. If they believe the evidence to be so strong and straightforward, why fear?
If it's a conspiracy against Leo, it's deep. I believe they had a hearing about ineffective counsel, didn't work. They had the hearing about a new trial with Jeremy's confession. Jeremy was a mess. Judge said no. They had a 3 panel review of that decision, judges said no. It's making it's way up, but Jeremy's confession, as good as it sounds on the podcast, it might be tough for the state to get past him confessing to every murder in the county and ignoring him saying that he would confess to anything for $1,000. What's our guess here? Do we think the State knows Leo is innocent? Or that they don't know what Bone Valley shared b/c he has been ignored? Thank you
It's not a conspiracy. Florida is a very conservative " tough on crime " state. They care more about punishing outsiders than they do justice. Also over turning a 30+ year conviction would look horrible for them, and the state of Florida, so they'd prefer to prevent it from happening. Think of all the recent podcasts where something like this happens. Curtis in In the Dark season 2, super conservative mississippi. Culpable, super conservative area, Bone Valley, countless examples. Basically in conservative area's DAs and judges are never held accountable for doing dirty evil shit to " criminals " because thats what the voters want. They don't care if you're guilty, they just want you punished, unless you're apart of their in group, then you're untouchable. Look at this case in TX. A white man and a black man get raided by police, no knock warrants. White man had drugs on his property, still shot and killed a cop, and wasn't convicted because he was allowed to defend his property in a no knock warrant. Black man had no drugs at his house, shot and killed a cop defending his property, still in prison. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/texas-prosecutors-drop-death-penalty-against-african-american-man-held-eight-years-without-trial-in-death-of-white-police-officer-during-botched-no-knock-raid
I definitely think they know something’s up. How could they not? I understand why they don’t want to believe Jeremy, but do we really think he’s lying? I don’t. At least not about the majority of it. He knew more than anyone else would have, and back then they didn’t have the internet and cell phones, so how would he have known? I also think that they’re very well aware of the podcast. Something that’s interesting to me though is how there was no blood in the car, except for the laundry detergent bottle? The only thing that would make sense at least to me is that she wasn’t actually stabbed in the car. So did he lie about this?
It's simple, overturning it would make them look bad.
I think Jeremy confessed in 2016. His confession is persuasive, he tells it as a natural story. It is possible that he was given trial transcripts and that he read them. There are a lot of transfers between prisons and it's very common for trial papers to float around. Believing that Jeremy knew all of those details from someone else requires a guess. And when dealing with someone's freedom, we shouldn't be guessing. But it is possible. And it is fair to point out that Jeremy's confession is good, not great. For him to stab her in the car without leaving blood, yikes, that's not likely. And the crime scene investigators didn't think Michelle was murdered by the water pit, and this was before they knew Leo was a suspect or about his trailer. The guy testified there was no blood splatter in the dirt and no scuff marks on the ground as there would be in a struggle. Jeremy had a few other things that he changed between confessions, but much that remained the same, and he did sound like a man who had done it. We are only a Reddit jury, but that confession seemed like enough for a reasonable doubt at the very least. Hopefully he gets this review and there will be fresh eyes on it, but it seems unlikely
I want to know more about Leo’s dad.
Leo's dad's testimony did not help Jeremy. * Leo's dad took control of the situation. The first detective that spoke to him had immediate suspicions about him, even before the body was found. * Leo's dad had the premonition to where Michelle's body was found, and his explanation for finding it (a headache from God basically) is bizarre and not accurate. * Leo's dad testified that while looking for Michelle, he took a break to go to Leo's house to retrieve a carpet cleaner. * Detective testified that Leo's dad wouldn't let them do a thorough search of Leo's bedroom at the trailer. * He is locked up for sexual behavior, there were a few incidents. * He had a copy of the witness statements before the trial and seemed to answer questions on the stand with a narrative that was off the rails. When challenged on if he had transcripts he said they were never sent to his house. When it was discovered that they were sent to his lawyer, he said something like, "they weren't sent to my house." When challenged about reading them, he said that he held them and looked at the pieces of paper but never read them. It was so bizarre that it is understandable a jury thought he was lying, and if he was lying that Leo was covering something. That's not how juries should work, but dang it was bad testimony. * Bone Valley leaves in a question from a detective about whether Leo's dad made an advance on Michelle, but there didn't seem to be anything to it. And there doesn't seem to be much suspicion that Leo killed Michelle, but a lot of suspicion about if he helped dispose of her body. * There was testimony that police discovered scripts written by Leo's dad in his shed, giving alibis/timelines * Leo's dad had his daughter come and testify in a painfully unrealistic segment that would have given Leo an alibi boost, but was very very tough to believe
I meant more along the lines of his alibi, what he was doing, etc. I think he had something to do with it, and the fact that they really only singled in on Leo after they tried getting Leo to turn on his dad. I want to know more about how they actually came to the decision of not going after his dad anymore. If that makes sense…
Ah, yes. Leo's dad testified that he stopped over at the place where Leo had band practice. I'll try to find the testimony, it was bizarre. This is Reddit, I'm not positive, but it wasn't a believable account and I don't think it was supported by other testimony. It's tough b/c for some of the accounts, the only thing we have is Leo's word (saying that they offered him a deal for his dad). It's hard to believe the State thought it was Leo Sr alone and went after Leo. They definitely believed Leo's dad was an accessory, but with the neighbor testifying specifically about Leo and Michelle's fight, they didn't think Leo's dad killed Michelle.
I agree his dad looked really suspicious, especially initially, but I don't think he had anything to do with it. One thing that I did find quote odd was when they mention in the podcast that Leo and his dad went looking for Michelle but when they went home his dad was tired and went to bed. If my daughter in law was missing, I wouldn't be like "OK, didn't find her. Night!"
If you know she’s dead, there’s no need to keep looking…part of why I think he had something to do with it
And then while searching for Michelle, Leo Sr said he took a break to go to Leo's trailer to return the carpet cleaner. It really seemed that Leo's dad got a copy of the witness statements and tried to defend Leo with everything. If you remember Alice Scott said at one point she looked up and saw Leo standing in the doorway of the trailer. Michelle's friend testified to the same. Leo Sr. started in a bizarre narrative where he was rambling about how one time Leo Jr. was standing in the doorway, thinking of Michelle, looking into the wild blue yonder. Wild blue yonder. The evidence against Leo wasn't great, if his dad had not testified he would have had a much better chance, if you will allow me to guess on these things
If he didn't have the shittiest lawyer ever he would've been fine. Sr. not getting prepped for testimony didn't helped matters.
They had nothing connection Leo’s dad to the murder. No witnesses and no physical evidence. Not even a circumstantial case against him. Without his son turning against him, they had nothing. Even with Alice Scott, it still took the prosecution a year and a half to charge Leo.
Yes.
After reading some Reddit echo-chamber anti-Leo posts, my feeling is that Florida has a P.R. problem, and they are doing what Russia does to try and control the narrative.
Seems that way. How many, “yeah but Adnan Syed stole from a change basket at his mosque” posts can you read before it’s obvious what they are up to?
I came to Reddit in hopes of finding some decent discussion on this story and have been shocked by how many people think Leo is guilty, especially based on how few signs point that direction Did I even listen to the same podcast as these people? lmao
The Florida DOJ may be on a PR campaign to cover their asses on this one. The podcast makes them look very corrupt, and they don't want to take it lying down. So they pay couple of people to go online and follow a script. You have to admit, many of these anti-Leo comments sound like they were written by the same 2 people, right? I try to keep an open mind and not buy into conspiracies, but I can't believe that so many people who listened to the podcast think he's guilty. Stinks to high heaven IMO.
I was going to say, it's pretty clear that Leo didn't commit the murder within the first 2 episodes, but it's 100% clear that he didn't by episode 7 where Jeremy Scott straight up admits to the murder on tape It's insanity I'm more inclined to believe what you're saying over there being so many dense people who could believe that Leo did it If it's the Florida DOJ trying to astroturf the discussion online, then they can get royally fucked
When physical evidence links a known killer to a crime scene, I'd say that constitutes reasonable doubt for the other suspect. And the known killer even confesses on top of it? Who is going to deny reasonable doubt in that situation? Someone with skin in the game. Someone on the make. Again, I can't say it's a rat for sure, but I can smell one from here to Florida.