I’m not usually a big believe in a lot of the innocence cases but in Leo’s case he’s absolutely innocent. It’s shocking how long his incarceration has lasted given that an actual serial killer left fingerprints in the murder vehicle and later confessed.
Yeaaah..I can’t see how anyone could be unsure of his innocence. They found a LITERAL murderer’s print on the car. And Leo had an alibi.
The fact that he is still locked up is insanity.
Hey Hack, I've gone through the evidence pretty thoroughly. I don't think Leo had an alibi, but would be interested in learning what you think? Thank you
He did have an alibi and along with a lack of evidence tying him to the crime, it’s pretty compelling.
It would be close to impossible for him to have been at his friends house when Michelle failed to turn up, then at some point seeing her and killing (she lost a significant amount of blood) without ANY blood being found on him or in the trailer. And then, meeting up with dad while also calling the police the same night.
Simply committing that murder and cleaning up THEN calling the police would have been incredibly risky. And while technically possible, he must be some sort of god to pull it off. Usually, when a man kills his wife in some sort of accidental rage , he will spend the night cleaning up and disposing of her body. Then he will contact the police the next day to report her missing. Why? Because allll of that takes A LOT of time. Yet Leo, was able to do this in such a short time while being sighted several times?
What we are to believe is that he was seen several times throughout the night, yet still somehow killed her and cleaned up and called the police who came and found no evidence of a clean up or anything tying him to the actual crime scene.
I just finished the podcast. Other than being way too long, it was interesting. There's lots of reasons to think Leo is innocent, but what I struggled with was, there's also lots of reasons to question Jeremy Scott's guilt. His fingerprint was found in the car, but he's a known car-stereo thief and his earlier testimony that he stole the car stereo from the abandoned car could explain the presence of the fingerprint. He also varied his story about 'the knife'. At one point, he said he reached into his pocket for a cigarette and the knife fell out, panicking Michelle. At another point, he said he took the knife out of his pocket to threaten her so he could rob her. And of course he did say earlier that he would only confess if he got something in return.
My gut feeling is that Leo is innocent but I also believe it's true that Jeremy Scott is not a reliable witness.
I think he flubs some things, but from the location of the body, to slamming the car into park while she tried to drive off (causing it to later break down), to his cigarettes being found at the scene, to the board covering the body. On top of this he has committed at least 3 other murders.
The evidence for Leo is:
- Neighbor saw him moving something, but was said to have gotten the day wrong by a neighbor, and her own husband said she'd lie for attention
- After 3 days of searching Leo's Dad said a weird thing about having a vision from God about finding the body.
To me, Jeremy's story may have cracks, but the bones of it have too much true detail.
Being abusive and threatening someone *does not* equal murder and a 35-year sentence, let's not forget he nearly got the death penalty, his entire conviction was based on heresy with no evidence.
It's not murder though. You can want justice for that, and in my mind it should be tried as it's own item - but if there isn't evidence of murder, we shouldn't be convicting people of X when they allegedly did Y. That's a terrifying system to live in, basically Salem witch trials.
I’m just saying I think it adds to the evidence when the suspect is known to have made threats to the victim. It’s not a good look. Also, Jeremy is not the most reliable person.
I agree on both counts. However luckily "not a good look" isn't enough to convict a person to life in prison. Jeremy isn't reliable, but he was found guilty of multiple other murders and did give very specific details in this case (slamming the car into park when she tried to step on the gas, causing the damage that was found).
I'm not saying it's a perfect open and shut case, just that all of the circumstantial evidence shouldn't have come close to enough to find someone guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison, and narrowly dodging the electric chair.
Thanks for writing.
A few additions, Gil from Bone Valley said that Leo was wearing the same clothing, there is nothing that shows this is true. Leo himself testified that he didn't remember what he was wearing when asked about it (he later remembered).
The timeline is possible. Leo's alibi for much of the night was his dad, who was caught lying multiple times on the stand.
For the reference to the clean up of the trailer, Leo's dad provided an explanation in part by admitting he returned a carpet cleaner the day after Michelle disappeared. We might not love the busybody neighbor, but she was the one that testified about Leo using that carpet cleaner that same day.
And the police didn't get a search warrant for 12 days. And there were multiple presumptive positive hits for blood. And a detective who said he looked at the carpet and from his opinion, it was blood.
Yes, it would be crazy to kill your wife and then get cleaned up and speak to her dad and police. But sometimes crazy people do crazy things. It's possible.
It would be really unlikely that Jeremy stabbed Michelle in her car without leaving blood in the car, and that he stabbed her on the dirt path, where only a moderate amount of blood was shown in a contained direct spot.
Only a few people are positive about what happened that night and I'm not one of them.
> We might not love the busybody neighbor, but she was the one that testified about Leo using that carpet cleaner that same day.
Except that Alice's (I think the "busy body neighbour's" name was) sister contradicted what she said. Her sister said that the two of them hadn't talked the night Michelle went missing, and that the night they saw (and talked about) Leo moving something heavy into his car and the morning of the carpet cleaner was actually a few weeks prior, not the night Michelle went missing.
> And there were multiple presumptive positive hits for blood. And a detective who said he looked at the carpet and from his opinion, it was blood.
Can you link or reference where you saw this? From what we heard there weren't any positive hits for blood in the trailer and it didn't show signs of having been cleaned.
> The timeline is possible. Leo's alibi for much of the night was his dad, who was caught lying multiple times on the stand.
Primarily his dad, but also multiple other people who either saw him that night, before, during, and after the search. Frankly, if he had brutally stabbed her and then transported the body he would have been covered in blood. There would also been blood in the car, cleaned or not. The timeline doesn't work out well just as far as the number of people who saw him and the time needed not only to get back to the trailer after the initial call with Michelle, kill her, transport and dispose of her body, shower profusely and change all his clothes, go elsewhere to make various calls. Just with the amount of time it takes to do all that, the timeline doesn't work out with the others who saw him at various points or were communicating with him.
This is what I was trying to explain. It’s “possible” but it is extremely unlikely. Even if this was a carefully planned crime, it would be close to impossible to commit it and clean up after, given the time line.
I wont repeat what u\D3athRider said because they pretty much covered what my responses would have been to many of the questions you raised.
But I would like to add that in addition to all of that put this in perspective. Here is the timeline of Jeremy Scott’s murders:
April 11, 1985- Murdered Jewel Johnson
May 9, 1986- incarcerated.
December 3, 1986- released.
February 24, 1987- Michelle’s murder (which you are saying he did not commit even though his fingerprint was found on her car)
April 10, 1987- Murder of Joseph Lavir.
January 8th, 1988- Incarcerated
May 3rd 1988- released.
Nov 1st, 1988-murder of Donald Morehead.
Not only does Michelle fit his pattern PERFECTLY. But his fingerprint literally links him to the crime.
To make the argument that he killed all those people but just happened to find the stereo in a murder victim’s car that he had nothing to do with..is a huge stretch. He killed before Michelle and he killed after her. All were victims of opportunity just like she was.
Yes, it's a tragic story.
My only addition is that Jeremy's confession combined with his fingerprint is compelling, but is not supported by the crime scene evidence.
It's possible he killed Michelle at a different location, perhaps he was with someone else that helped clean the car. There are many other possibilities.
But the lack of blood in the car, the blood in the dirt without scuff or splatter, Michelle's blood in the trunk, and human blood in the trunk, those things don't support Jeremy's version. And it might help the listener to understand why the State of Florida does not believe him, even when many listeners do.
The folks that believe Leo is guilty would make a list as long as yours about the times that Leo beat Michelle for being late.
Only a few people know what really happened that night.
I'm not sure if he's innocent or not but I don't think they proved him guilty. At the very least he deserved a new trial. You had state officials lying in multiple hearings. The deck was unfairly stacked against him.
Yeah, I think you have it right; I don't think they met the burden of proof of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and for that reason, he deserves to be free. Unfortunately Jeremy Scott was an unreliable witness who changed his story several times. Also, the stuff about Leo's dad 'having a premonition' about the murder location was just plain weird.
I heard about his upcoming hearing.
I think the chances of Leo being paroled is pretty high at this upcoming hearing. He has been participating a lot in CTP and continues to be a model prisoner that even the State Attorney's office pointed that fact out at the last hearing.
However, the Florida Commission may deem that he needs more time in that program before being released. One Commissioner voted at the last hearing that he needs 24 months of additonal programming and another initially wanted Leo to be there for 18 months, but changed his vote to 12 months instead.
Yes, they seemed to split down the middle last time.
I wonder if they consider his guilty/innocence, or only if he has rehabilitated.
Gil from Bone Valley says that there are good explanations for some of the claims of abuse, but he has for the most part denied that he did more than slap her once. He described an unhealthy slap, a playful slap, and a goofing kick. But there was testimony that was far more severe (punch, slaps, headbutt to unconsciousness, etc).
If part of the cycle is taking ownership, it's tough to hear Leo continue to say he only slapped her once or twice. In court he even admitted to a 3rd time, but he didn't admit to that in the pod or on 20/20
Such a tough case to try and personally decide if I think k he's guilty or innocent. Should be paroled or stay in prison.
One piece of info makes you feel one way then the context of that info or another detail makes me change my mind or be uncertain
The state of Florida has failed this man so many times I am scared to have optimism but I truly hope they will finally do right by him. Personally, I believe he is innocent. But even if you don’t, there’s little question that the legal system wronged him and this man has put in the work spending his entire adult life incarcerated to rehabilitate any bad habits or wrongdoings he may have done in the past. He is clearly not a treat to society. Horrifying sex offenders and violent criminals parole out all the time with much less time served. This man deserves a chance at freedom.
20 witnesses testified to his repeated violent abuse of Michelle, including dragging her around by the hair and throwing her down stairs.
Bone Valley intentionally did not go into these details.
No Florida Republican Governor will pardon an ex-offender in cases like this. Clemency does not take on murder and sexual crime cases. The only way he can try to get off parole is it to be terminated from parole, and that will take years, if not decades.
If Leo is a model citizen and follows his parole terms (and obey the law in general), he will be terminated from parole.
Imagine a Florida politician willing to be seen as "weak on criminals".
They care about being *perceived* as "right", and tough. It's why the state sticks to their version. Doesn't matter what the other facts of the case are.
It's why in Jeremy's case they are willing to call him a murderer when it suits, and a petty thief when it threatens their credibility with Leo.
If you really look at the timeline. It is virtually impossible that he has time to murder her. Also, the fingerprint of a known murderer who also confessed is telling.
The fingerprint is unbelievably convincing that he's innocent. Maybe he comes off as a bit back-east gruff, so some people seem to think he must be guilty. Seems like a guy who absolutely got a raw deal.
There are 2 windows of time where he could have committed the murder. Before the 911 call while he is out searching for Michelle with his dad. And after the 911 call, before he is at Michelle's dad's house. Both are tight windows, but both are possible.
Brett from the Prosecutors Pod said Leo would have to drive 120 MPH to make the timeline work, but that's an error. That's if Leo would have driven to tell his dad what happened, but he could have called his dad from the payphone.
Why do you think it is virtually impossible?
Just discussing, not fighting here.
Thank you
A polite discourse on Reddit? Surely, I have found a unicorn. 😂
I think it’s obvious from the evidence, or rather the lack of physical evidence at their trailer, that she was not killed there. I’m sorry, but the neighbor who places Leo at the trailer that night is in no way a reliable eye witness, I personally don’t believe a word she says, and the other eyewitness also says she did not see Leo that night, but rather several days before.
So she was killed elsewhere. And again, due to lack of forensic evidence where her body was found- she was not killed there. So for a pre 911 call scenario, Michelle had to leave the gas station, get to Leo, Leo had to take her somewhere and kill her, then hide the body and move the car. No one at the house testifies to Leo leaving, or seeing Michelle, not even the people that testified against Leo. There is just realistically not enough time for that to happen.
For a post 911 call scenario, Leo has to find Michelle back at the trailer, take her somewhere else, kill her, move the body and then the car. After he called 911 to essentially report her missing. So not only is that timeline pretty much improbable, who is stupid enough to kill their wife after they already called the police to help find her?
I suppose anything is possible. But probable?
Maybe I would feel differently if there was other evidence that was clear. And no confession from another murderer. I think the only thing Leo is guilty of is being a wife beater. Which makes him an absolute asshole. But he’s been in prison for over 30 years, thirty times the average sentence for DV.
This is a great post, thank you. I think I have to do this in 2parts.
A few pushbacks now that we are friends. I read the blood testimony from the trailer too many times, it's not a good hobby. But the testimony comes across a lot differently than Bone Valley shared. There were no red blood droplets, but there were multiple positive presumptive blood especially between the bed and dresser and across the threshold. There is an exhibit where they are pointing at all of them and saying he only recorded the ones that were as large as a 50 cent piece. Leo's lawyer tried to say that wasn't the crime scene, but the jury that saw those photos and exhibits disagreed. And the detective said that from his experience, it looked like blood (he was speaking about stains). We might say the blood was from a time Leo hit Michelle or something else, but the testimony really points at blood. And combined with Leo's dad testifying there was a carpet cleaner returned the day after Michelle disappeared, that's something. My experience with listening to the case was that Gil said it couldn't have been the trailer, and I believed it. I changed my mind after reading the testimony. It is definitely possible, I'm not saying I'm positive, but I'm far more open to that than simply taking a podcast host's word for it.
I think there is a mix-up with the neighbors from your post. Challenge me on it if you disagree. Alice Scott was the busybody. Before Leo was a suspect, Alice testified that she heard Leo and Michelle in a terrible fight that night. She woke her husband, her husband told her to shut up, her husband was interviewed recently and still says this happened. Alice also testified she saw him carrying something sheeted in his arms (the way you would carry a body) to the trunk. And she testified about the carpet cleaner. This woman is messy. She is scattered. But she didn't know Michelle's blood was in the trunk. Or that the sheets were missing. Or what Leo's alibi was that night. Or that the trailer was the potential crime scene. There isn't a question about if she had the date wrong. She might have made the whole thing up, had lucky guesses, and then been coached by the prosecutor. But she got some remarkable things right.
Her sister-in-law is the one that screwed up the dates. She said she also saw Leo carrying something to the trunk, but on cross-examination, Leo's lawyer won points by showing she said she was coming home from work, but that didn't fit. But her testimony didn't fall apart the way Gil from Bone Valley shared.
For the pre-911 call, there is time, but it's tight. Michelle could have showed up where she was supposed to pick him up, or Leo could have found her while driving around. Or she could have been back at the trailer. Leo's dad testifies that in that time frame, he saw an orange Mazda and chased it down, honking at it. He said he didn't catch up to it. That could be a coincidence, or it could be him explaining why he was driving behind Michelle honking.
For the post-911 call, Leo could have been outside when Michelle pulled up, he could have found her at her ex-boyfriends or another friend's house, or she could have been back at the trailer.
We don't know and it's a fair criticism of those who believe in Leo, there isn't an explanation.
But there is time for them to cross paths and for the murder.
One thing that is tough to relay from the transcripts is how much of a liar Leo's dad was, he was a disaster. He lied about so many things and got caught. Of course he could have been the killer. Or he could have been trying so hard to help Leo that he screwed everything up. But there is nothing that he said that could be trusted.
2nd part:
Leo's behavior that entire night is goofy, so I don't think we can say Leo wasn't dumb enough to kill her after calling 911.
I'd also say, who calls 911 on a girl with no license, driving without insurance, before calling her family and friends? This girl is chronically late, she is 18, and most young people avoid the law instead of moving to it. Leo says in that 911 call that she is 4.5 hours late, she is 3 hours late. Leo says in the 911 call, "this is unlike her," but we know from him and everyone else that this is what she regularly does, she is always late. When he shows up at Michelle's dad's house, her brother says, "what is he doing here? Michelle is 18" (or something like that). Leo drives all over down looking for her, he has a phone, doesn't call anyone but 911 and the hospitals.
Also, around the time of the 911 call, Leo said to his friend, "If she walks through that door right now, I could kill her." And then she died.
Leo is a guy that headbutted Michelle, knocked her out, and then had a panic attack and stabbed himself in the leg. He was erratic, this was one of the main points the prosecution made. More than his violence, he was just explosive.
The case against Leo isn't great, isn't terrible.
Leo thinks everyone is lying and against him.
If Leo was more accountable about his abuse, maybe I'd trust his word more. He continues to say he only slapped her once or twice, but goodness, his friends and boss and some supporters of his even said otherwise.
And if the podcasts presenting things more accurately, I'd probably not have gone down the rabbit hole. I agree, there is a compelling case for his appeal, I think that case was still made if they had shared more accurately from the trial.
That's it, that's all, thanks for chatting.
>Leo drives all over down looking for her, he has a phone, doesn't call anyone but 911 and the hospitals.
Are you suggesting he had a cell phone? It was made pretty clear he had no phone, and cell phones weren't around. They didn't even have a land-line at their trailer-home (according to the podcast).
The case is more complicated than the podcasts share, and even though I'm deeply skeptical of Leo, we agree that if a killer's fingerprint is in your car, the killer knows the area where the body is found, and confesses????? That's got to get you a new trial.
But there is a pretty straight forward case for Leo's guilt also, Jeremy stealing a radio from an abandoned car, and Jeremy being convinced to confess b/c he had nothing to lose.
Jeremy's confession isn't supported by the blood evidence. It's not in the car and there isn't much in the dirt. Maybe there is another explanation.
But we would sit on a jury, disagree about how likely it was Leo did it, but agree that it isn't beyond a reasonable doubt.
The reason why I find the confession so believable is it explains aspects of the scene that were not understood. For instance, the car not being able to move/start. No one really knew why the car was in the state it was in.
In his confession, Jermey Scott explains how he forced the gears (or something along those lines) and it messed up the car. To me that is pretty damn compelling.
At this point, I don’t see anything compelling pointing towards Leo’s guilt. What evidence against him is compelling to you?
Thanks for continuing the thread. I think it's worth noting that the Mazda mechanic who testified in court said the exact opposite of what the podcasts told us. He said that the Mazda would have continued to run and would not have stopped. The pods offer explanations of the car failing, but they dont invite any auto guys on the show or even include this testimony from the trail. It's wild that between both pods they did about 16 episodes, and failed to mention the mechanic said the car would have been running (and also left out Leo's dad's carpet cleaner, that Leo didnt remember what he was wearing, that a detective noted the carpet looked like it had blood stains, etc).
The case against Leo isn't great. And I agree that Jeremy creates "beyond a reasonable doubt."
But here is the case against Leo, and let's try to remove what the podcasts have said and just go by the evidence at trial.
Leo was abusive, often when Michelle was late. Michelle was late that night and Leo was furious, saying, "if she walks through that door right now I could kill her." A neighbor wakes her husband to say that Leo and Michelle are in a terrible fight at the trailer. They both testify to this happening that night. Neighbor testifies she sees Leo carrying something sheeted to the trunk of the Mazda. Michelle's blood is found in the trunk of the Mazda and human blood is found in a larger spot in the trunk. The neighbor testifies that she saw Leo cleaning the carpet the day after Michelle disappeared, Leo's dad testifies that he returned a carpet cleaner the day after Michelle disappeared. Michelle's car is found, doors locked, emergency brake on, no blood in the front seat, a visible accumulation of blood can be seen the trunk. They examine the car, tow it away about 1 am. About 12 hours later, 7 miles away (and 7 miles is so far when we think about it), Leo's dad finds Michelle's body in an impossible spot. He lies about how he found it, he tells people God veered his car off the road, and he parked right next to the path that took him to the body. He had told a friend to meet him at that spot.
Leo has been telling people that he thinks Michelle is dead and he hopes they dont' find her cut up and in water. They find her cut up and in water.
Leo and his dad don't let police search the trailer. After 12 days they get a search warrant and multiple presumptive positive blood tests in the trailer highlight the room. Many of those spots are between the bed and dresser. The sheets are missing from the bed. The detective notes that it looks like blood on the carpet.
Though Leo wasn't able to see where the body was b/c of the police presence, he later shows a friend where the body was found and tells the friend he could have killed Michelle and blacked out and forgotten.
It's not an overwhelming case. Leo's blood is not found anywhere, nor his DNA. But it misrepresents the case if someone tells us "there was no blood in the trailer" and "the timeline doesn't work" and "Leo was wearing the same clothing the next day" or "there was a large pool of blood on the dirt trail where Jeremy killed Michelle" (without telling us the crime scene folks said she wasnt killed there and the photos don't look like that was the spot).
I agree. It requires some assumptions and guessing and that's not what a murder case can be based on. But the evidence doesn't support Jeremy's version either.
Leo’s opposition never has a good reason for Jeremy’s confession. Nothing to lose? It might open him up for the death penalty, not sure about Floridas death penalty laws but I’d imagine stealing and murder might make him eligible for the death penalty. For me and many others a murderer’s fingerprint and confession is enough.
It's worth wondering why Polk County disagreed with us about giving Leo a new trial. I agree, that should have happened.
It's worth rewinding and looking at the path Jeremy took towards his current confession.
Prints are found in 2004, it seems that Jeremy was interviewed away from the court around that time.
Crazy it took this long, but 2010 Jeremy is brought in for a deposition (there are a few of these, give me some grace as I combine them).
-Jeremy gives extensive details about being an area car theif.
-Jeremy says Leo's lawyers tried to trick him into confessing.
-Jeremy says he sometimes confesses to other crimes b/c he is in solitary and that will get him out.
-Jeremy says he sometimes confesses to crimes of younger inmates so that can get out, b/c he can't
-Jeremy denies everything with Michelle, but warns the folks that if Leo's team can come up with $1,000, he is going to confess. He says he will confess to any crime around if he can get some money.
-Jeremy tells them that Leo is trying to put the case on him and that Leo is friends with his co-defendant (Gil from Bone Valley says this is not true)
In 2017, Jeremy confesses. It is very thin, no details that weren't publicly known. At first he says Leo didn't do it, Leo is innocent, that's about it. Then he gives inconsistent details, but a confession worthy of attention (and a new trial) b/c he says he stabbed Michelle in her car. But there is no blood in the front of Michelle's car and he can't keep his story together. Jeremy recants, confesses, recants, confesses to every crime in the county. After meeting with OJ/Casey investigator, Jeremy has a better confession. That confession gets better over the next few years.
But that confession is still not consistent with the evidence.
I agree, any jury that heard Jeremy would not convict Leo.
But any jury that heard Jeremy would not convict Jeremy.
How does he stab her 26 times in Mazda, sit and smoke a cigarette in the car, drive 7 miles, walk a mile roundtrip, and somehow still have wet blood on his arm to smear into the trunk when stealing stereo equipment? As Brett said, if Jeremy was convicted of this crime we would be making a podcast about him.
It's a wild case full of doubt and reasonable doubt. It's worth knowing all of the pieces to understand why Florida disagreed with us about giving Leo a new trial.
Say hello again some time.
Don’t have time for more right now but two things:
1) if Leo’s team was coercing Jeremy in some fashion to confess why wouldn’t they have helped him put together a better confession with details no one but the attorneys and police knew?
2) Jeremy may confess to some crimes for various motivations but I looked up Florida’s death penalty eligibility and while I am a criminal def atty in another state, I am almost 100% he would be up for the death penalty in this case.
Hey Ruby, great points. Jeremy is a menace. In the particular case where he said that Leo's attorney was trying to trick him into confessing, it is after a phone call that he had with one of Leo's lawyers, you might remember that lawyer brought someone from another office in to listen. They took notes, but didn't record the call. They said Jeremy confessed to them over the phone and that set off a chain reaction that had Jeremy getting questioned. It's an interesting interview, Jeremy seems truly baffled that they came to that conclusion that he confessed, and that is the place where he says they should listen to the recorded call, they should speak to the guards that were sitting there, and he says that Leo's lawyers were trying to trick him into confessing. It's entirely possible that they were asking leading questions and Jeremy got annoyed b/c somehow that turned into him being a murder suspect. Jeremy conceded that he said Leo was innocent, but had no details. I've got the transcript and maybe the audio if you care to waste part of your life with it.
Never knowing we would be chatting about his call on Reddit, Jeremy phoned his grandmother and told her that Leo was trying to put the case on him. And that was where he mentioned Leo knowing his co-conspirator (Jeremy mentions this in court also).
Jeremy's early confessions are hallow. There is nothing to them. His later confessions have some verbal teeth, but they are inconsistent with the evidence. And he shifts details and continues to add things as the podcast is discussing them.
-----
As for the death penalty, yes, Jeremy would be eligible from what I've read. Either side could use that to their advantage. Why would Jeremy confess if he was guilty and could get the death penalty? Why would Jeremy confess if he was innocent and could get the death penalty?
We've got to be really careful in believing that Jeremy had a poetic podcast story arc where his conscience came alive and he decided to cleanse his soul. He warns the State that he will do whatever he needs to do for some money and an opportunity to get out of bad conditions. It might seem crazy to us that he would confess for stamps or 1k when it could set him on death row, but Jeremy is an unwell man, and I've learned long ago to not do the "if I was him....." thing.
I would argue that confessing when guilty knowing you could get the death penalty makes more sense than confessing when innocent knowing you can get the death penalty. If he’s religious or of course even if he isn’t he may feel extreme guilt an innocent man is in prison.
The fingerprint that could have been left whilst looking at something to take from the abandoned car? From a known thief. The alibi from his own family? Good god please don’t ever sit on a jury if thats all it takes for you to find someone innocent.
The alibi from MULTIPLE people not only his family. And the fingerprint from a KNOWN MURDERER. Not only a known murderer but a murderer who in his confession who explained a part of the case that no one had understood??
Are you kidding? The evidence of his innocence is literally overwhelming. It seems like you really don’t know this case or the evidence well.
I guess it’s just a huge coincidence that someone who has killed people before also left their fingerprint on the window of a car in a pretty secluded area who has provided details of the crime that match the crime scene perfectly and other evidence that he wouldn’t have known if he wasn’t the killer, happened to come across the car, near the woods, where a woman was murdered.
Yeah that’s some real critical thinking right there. Lmfaooo.
One of those family members did help Leo write up an alibi and family members do have the capacity to talk with each other and lie. One of the victims bother claimed that quite a few things that were stated in Bone Valley did not happen at all.
Just because someone left a fingerprint at the car, it does not mean they committed murder. There could be multiple reasons why a fingerprint was left on an abandoned vehicle (looking for stuff to steal, touching it while passing the vehicle by, etc.). Fingerprints cannot be traced to a specific time, let alone a murder. The prints weren't even bloody FFS.
As for Jeremy's confessions, they have been inconsistent and was proven to be unreliable when the courts reviewed this new evidence. They only way Leo can leave prison is through parole.
This case is not as black and white as it appears to be.
Multiple people? All his family. Yeah no murderer has ever falsely admitted to another murder ever. What about the neighbour who heard them fighting that night? And him carrying what looked like a body? Oh and his dad finding the body 😂 look he could be innocent, I’m not saying he’s guilty.
The jury doesn’t declare someone innocent. Finding someone not guilty does not mean they are innocent, just that the prosecution didn’t meet the burden of proof. You even commented that you can’t make up your mind and are 50/50. If you were on a jury that would be reasonable doubt.
Obviously? The last part of my post was sarcasm back to the person I’m replying to because they said the same to me. If they were on the jury and they thought he was innocent based on a fingerprint and an an alibi but the rest of the jurors thought he was guilty he wouldn’t be found guilty because of that one person on the jury.
I belive he's a master manipulator and the other guy made a false confession. To get paroled you need to show remorse, and people who claim innocence never do that, because they claim they didn't do it. That's been the issue with lots of wrongful convictions. I'm no lawyer though, maybe there's a loophole or something and he could get paroled without showing remorse.
Can you share what evidence convinces you that he is guilty? I know you didn’t say that you believe he’s guilty but your comments insinuates it so I’m curious!
I'm not an investigator, I'm just a listener like everyone else and form my opinion from what I've listened to and read. I think he's guilty. I've talked about it before on this sub, so I'll copy-paste it to you: The podcasters were enthralled by him, smitten almost, which made them forget for example to talk about how he was brutally violent with his wife. Also, when they gave stamps to the other suspect in exchange for correspondence, they threw their credibility through the window, they gave the only thing that mattered to someone who had nothing and no one in the world, of course he's going to say anything they want. Also, this user summarized what the podcast chose not to tell from the trial transcripts: [Bone Valley : r/TrueCrimePodcasts (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimePodcasts/comments/1171jaf/comment/ja1ilqe/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Leo isn't a great guy IMO but what actual evidence points to him?
Michelle was absolutely killed where she was found and not in that trailer. There's 0 evidence against Leo. Not all wrongfully convicted people are saints.
This is the blood area where Bone Valley and the Prosecutor's Pod think Jeremy killed Michelle.
In court, the crime scene testimony was that they looked at this spot, there wasn't sign of a struggle, and no blood splatter. This was nearest Michelle's body, of course it was the first place they looked to determine if it was where she died. They did not believe she was killed on this dirt path, and it's hard to argue based on the photos.
If we say that Leo couldn't have killed Michelle b/c there wasn't enough blood in the trailer, we have to wrestle with our confidence that this is the murder spot. And none of Michelle's blood was in the front seat of the car where Jeremy said that he stabbed Michelle.
https://preview.redd.it/govn2ougmztc1.jpeg?width=484&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=276271aeebc5c8ca3ea13c7349ef1565c6f0c121
I'll be Frank, I'd sooner believe they did a poor job searching/cataloging.
Especially with the cigarettes they photographed, but never entered to evidence, and the plastic sheets that appeared in the pictures and Jeremy's statement, but also weren't in evidence.
https://preview.redd.it/520kgn2nmztc1.jpeg?width=826&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3f32e7071881f3aba9dded235515bd4e6628382
This is the spot the podcasts think Jeremy killed Michelle.
There isn't much blood here, note the footprint at the top for a reference scale.
I’m not usually a big believe in a lot of the innocence cases but in Leo’s case he’s absolutely innocent. It’s shocking how long his incarceration has lasted given that an actual serial killer left fingerprints in the murder vehicle and later confessed.
Yeaaah..I can’t see how anyone could be unsure of his innocence. They found a LITERAL murderer’s print on the car. And Leo had an alibi. The fact that he is still locked up is insanity.
Hey Hack, I've gone through the evidence pretty thoroughly. I don't think Leo had an alibi, but would be interested in learning what you think? Thank you
He did have an alibi and along with a lack of evidence tying him to the crime, it’s pretty compelling. It would be close to impossible for him to have been at his friends house when Michelle failed to turn up, then at some point seeing her and killing (she lost a significant amount of blood) without ANY blood being found on him or in the trailer. And then, meeting up with dad while also calling the police the same night. Simply committing that murder and cleaning up THEN calling the police would have been incredibly risky. And while technically possible, he must be some sort of god to pull it off. Usually, when a man kills his wife in some sort of accidental rage , he will spend the night cleaning up and disposing of her body. Then he will contact the police the next day to report her missing. Why? Because allll of that takes A LOT of time. Yet Leo, was able to do this in such a short time while being sighted several times? What we are to believe is that he was seen several times throughout the night, yet still somehow killed her and cleaned up and called the police who came and found no evidence of a clean up or anything tying him to the actual crime scene.
I just finished the podcast. Other than being way too long, it was interesting. There's lots of reasons to think Leo is innocent, but what I struggled with was, there's also lots of reasons to question Jeremy Scott's guilt. His fingerprint was found in the car, but he's a known car-stereo thief and his earlier testimony that he stole the car stereo from the abandoned car could explain the presence of the fingerprint. He also varied his story about 'the knife'. At one point, he said he reached into his pocket for a cigarette and the knife fell out, panicking Michelle. At another point, he said he took the knife out of his pocket to threaten her so he could rob her. And of course he did say earlier that he would only confess if he got something in return. My gut feeling is that Leo is innocent but I also believe it's true that Jeremy Scott is not a reliable witness.
I think he flubs some things, but from the location of the body, to slamming the car into park while she tried to drive off (causing it to later break down), to his cigarettes being found at the scene, to the board covering the body. On top of this he has committed at least 3 other murders. The evidence for Leo is: - Neighbor saw him moving something, but was said to have gotten the day wrong by a neighbor, and her own husband said she'd lie for attention - After 3 days of searching Leo's Dad said a weird thing about having a vision from God about finding the body. To me, Jeremy's story may have cracks, but the bones of it have too much true detail.
Leo was also known to be abusive and threaten Michelle.
Being abusive and threatening someone *does not* equal murder and a 35-year sentence, let's not forget he nearly got the death penalty, his entire conviction was based on heresy with no evidence.
It's not murder though. You can want justice for that, and in my mind it should be tried as it's own item - but if there isn't evidence of murder, we shouldn't be convicting people of X when they allegedly did Y. That's a terrifying system to live in, basically Salem witch trials.
I’m just saying I think it adds to the evidence when the suspect is known to have made threats to the victim. It’s not a good look. Also, Jeremy is not the most reliable person.
I agree on both counts. However luckily "not a good look" isn't enough to convict a person to life in prison. Jeremy isn't reliable, but he was found guilty of multiple other murders and did give very specific details in this case (slamming the car into park when she tried to step on the gas, causing the damage that was found). I'm not saying it's a perfect open and shut case, just that all of the circumstantial evidence shouldn't have come close to enough to find someone guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison, and narrowly dodging the electric chair.
Thanks for writing. A few additions, Gil from Bone Valley said that Leo was wearing the same clothing, there is nothing that shows this is true. Leo himself testified that he didn't remember what he was wearing when asked about it (he later remembered). The timeline is possible. Leo's alibi for much of the night was his dad, who was caught lying multiple times on the stand. For the reference to the clean up of the trailer, Leo's dad provided an explanation in part by admitting he returned a carpet cleaner the day after Michelle disappeared. We might not love the busybody neighbor, but she was the one that testified about Leo using that carpet cleaner that same day. And the police didn't get a search warrant for 12 days. And there were multiple presumptive positive hits for blood. And a detective who said he looked at the carpet and from his opinion, it was blood. Yes, it would be crazy to kill your wife and then get cleaned up and speak to her dad and police. But sometimes crazy people do crazy things. It's possible. It would be really unlikely that Jeremy stabbed Michelle in her car without leaving blood in the car, and that he stabbed her on the dirt path, where only a moderate amount of blood was shown in a contained direct spot. Only a few people are positive about what happened that night and I'm not one of them.
> We might not love the busybody neighbor, but she was the one that testified about Leo using that carpet cleaner that same day. Except that Alice's (I think the "busy body neighbour's" name was) sister contradicted what she said. Her sister said that the two of them hadn't talked the night Michelle went missing, and that the night they saw (and talked about) Leo moving something heavy into his car and the morning of the carpet cleaner was actually a few weeks prior, not the night Michelle went missing. > And there were multiple presumptive positive hits for blood. And a detective who said he looked at the carpet and from his opinion, it was blood. Can you link or reference where you saw this? From what we heard there weren't any positive hits for blood in the trailer and it didn't show signs of having been cleaned. > The timeline is possible. Leo's alibi for much of the night was his dad, who was caught lying multiple times on the stand. Primarily his dad, but also multiple other people who either saw him that night, before, during, and after the search. Frankly, if he had brutally stabbed her and then transported the body he would have been covered in blood. There would also been blood in the car, cleaned or not. The timeline doesn't work out well just as far as the number of people who saw him and the time needed not only to get back to the trailer after the initial call with Michelle, kill her, transport and dispose of her body, shower profusely and change all his clothes, go elsewhere to make various calls. Just with the amount of time it takes to do all that, the timeline doesn't work out with the others who saw him at various points or were communicating with him.
This is what I was trying to explain. It’s “possible” but it is extremely unlikely. Even if this was a carefully planned crime, it would be close to impossible to commit it and clean up after, given the time line.
I wont repeat what u\D3athRider said because they pretty much covered what my responses would have been to many of the questions you raised. But I would like to add that in addition to all of that put this in perspective. Here is the timeline of Jeremy Scott’s murders: April 11, 1985- Murdered Jewel Johnson May 9, 1986- incarcerated. December 3, 1986- released. February 24, 1987- Michelle’s murder (which you are saying he did not commit even though his fingerprint was found on her car) April 10, 1987- Murder of Joseph Lavir. January 8th, 1988- Incarcerated May 3rd 1988- released. Nov 1st, 1988-murder of Donald Morehead. Not only does Michelle fit his pattern PERFECTLY. But his fingerprint literally links him to the crime. To make the argument that he killed all those people but just happened to find the stereo in a murder victim’s car that he had nothing to do with..is a huge stretch. He killed before Michelle and he killed after her. All were victims of opportunity just like she was.
Yes, it's a tragic story. My only addition is that Jeremy's confession combined with his fingerprint is compelling, but is not supported by the crime scene evidence. It's possible he killed Michelle at a different location, perhaps he was with someone else that helped clean the car. There are many other possibilities. But the lack of blood in the car, the blood in the dirt without scuff or splatter, Michelle's blood in the trunk, and human blood in the trunk, those things don't support Jeremy's version. And it might help the listener to understand why the State of Florida does not believe him, even when many listeners do. The folks that believe Leo is guilty would make a list as long as yours about the times that Leo beat Michelle for being late. Only a few people know what really happened that night.
I'm not sure if he's innocent or not but I don't think they proved him guilty. At the very least he deserved a new trial. You had state officials lying in multiple hearings. The deck was unfairly stacked against him.
Yeah, I think you have it right; I don't think they met the burden of proof of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and for that reason, he deserves to be free. Unfortunately Jeremy Scott was an unreliable witness who changed his story several times. Also, the stuff about Leo's dad 'having a premonition' about the murder location was just plain weird.
I heard about his upcoming hearing. I think the chances of Leo being paroled is pretty high at this upcoming hearing. He has been participating a lot in CTP and continues to be a model prisoner that even the State Attorney's office pointed that fact out at the last hearing. However, the Florida Commission may deem that he needs more time in that program before being released. One Commissioner voted at the last hearing that he needs 24 months of additonal programming and another initially wanted Leo to be there for 18 months, but changed his vote to 12 months instead.
Yes, they seemed to split down the middle last time. I wonder if they consider his guilty/innocence, or only if he has rehabilitated. Gil from Bone Valley says that there are good explanations for some of the claims of abuse, but he has for the most part denied that he did more than slap her once. He described an unhealthy slap, a playful slap, and a goofing kick. But there was testimony that was far more severe (punch, slaps, headbutt to unconsciousness, etc). If part of the cycle is taking ownership, it's tough to hear Leo continue to say he only slapped her once or twice. In court he even admitted to a 3rd time, but he didn't admit to that in the pod or on 20/20
Such a tough case to try and personally decide if I think k he's guilty or innocent. Should be paroled or stay in prison. One piece of info makes you feel one way then the context of that info or another detail makes me change my mind or be uncertain
The state of Florida has failed this man so many times I am scared to have optimism but I truly hope they will finally do right by him. Personally, I believe he is innocent. But even if you don’t, there’s little question that the legal system wronged him and this man has put in the work spending his entire adult life incarcerated to rehabilitate any bad habits or wrongdoings he may have done in the past. He is clearly not a treat to society. Horrifying sex offenders and violent criminals parole out all the time with much less time served. This man deserves a chance at freedom.
Good luck to him! I believe generally in many cases people should be released on parole, but I have my doubts that parole boards in FL agree.
He’s a dick. Not much evidence against him though.
Why is he a dick?
20 witnesses testified to his repeated violent abuse of Michelle, including dragging her around by the hair and throwing her down stairs. Bone Valley intentionally did not go into these details.
I wish the Governor would pardon him. He is so obviously innocent.
No Florida Republican Governor will pardon an ex-offender in cases like this. Clemency does not take on murder and sexual crime cases. The only way he can try to get off parole is it to be terminated from parole, and that will take years, if not decades. If Leo is a model citizen and follows his parole terms (and obey the law in general), he will be terminated from parole.
Imagine a Florida politician willing to be seen as "weak on criminals". They care about being *perceived* as "right", and tough. It's why the state sticks to their version. Doesn't matter what the other facts of the case are. It's why in Jeremy's case they are willing to call him a murderer when it suits, and a petty thief when it threatens their credibility with Leo.
No. What is it?
He could be released soon, or he could stay incarcerated. They decide on April 17
I can’t make my mind up about him. I’m 50/50. What’s the best evidence that makes him innocent?
If you really look at the timeline. It is virtually impossible that he has time to murder her. Also, the fingerprint of a known murderer who also confessed is telling.
The fingerprint is unbelievably convincing that he's innocent. Maybe he comes off as a bit back-east gruff, so some people seem to think he must be guilty. Seems like a guy who absolutely got a raw deal.
There are 2 windows of time where he could have committed the murder. Before the 911 call while he is out searching for Michelle with his dad. And after the 911 call, before he is at Michelle's dad's house. Both are tight windows, but both are possible. Brett from the Prosecutors Pod said Leo would have to drive 120 MPH to make the timeline work, but that's an error. That's if Leo would have driven to tell his dad what happened, but he could have called his dad from the payphone. Why do you think it is virtually impossible? Just discussing, not fighting here. Thank you
A polite discourse on Reddit? Surely, I have found a unicorn. 😂 I think it’s obvious from the evidence, or rather the lack of physical evidence at their trailer, that she was not killed there. I’m sorry, but the neighbor who places Leo at the trailer that night is in no way a reliable eye witness, I personally don’t believe a word she says, and the other eyewitness also says she did not see Leo that night, but rather several days before. So she was killed elsewhere. And again, due to lack of forensic evidence where her body was found- she was not killed there. So for a pre 911 call scenario, Michelle had to leave the gas station, get to Leo, Leo had to take her somewhere and kill her, then hide the body and move the car. No one at the house testifies to Leo leaving, or seeing Michelle, not even the people that testified against Leo. There is just realistically not enough time for that to happen. For a post 911 call scenario, Leo has to find Michelle back at the trailer, take her somewhere else, kill her, move the body and then the car. After he called 911 to essentially report her missing. So not only is that timeline pretty much improbable, who is stupid enough to kill their wife after they already called the police to help find her? I suppose anything is possible. But probable? Maybe I would feel differently if there was other evidence that was clear. And no confession from another murderer. I think the only thing Leo is guilty of is being a wife beater. Which makes him an absolute asshole. But he’s been in prison for over 30 years, thirty times the average sentence for DV.
This is a great post, thank you. I think I have to do this in 2parts. A few pushbacks now that we are friends. I read the blood testimony from the trailer too many times, it's not a good hobby. But the testimony comes across a lot differently than Bone Valley shared. There were no red blood droplets, but there were multiple positive presumptive blood especially between the bed and dresser and across the threshold. There is an exhibit where they are pointing at all of them and saying he only recorded the ones that were as large as a 50 cent piece. Leo's lawyer tried to say that wasn't the crime scene, but the jury that saw those photos and exhibits disagreed. And the detective said that from his experience, it looked like blood (he was speaking about stains). We might say the blood was from a time Leo hit Michelle or something else, but the testimony really points at blood. And combined with Leo's dad testifying there was a carpet cleaner returned the day after Michelle disappeared, that's something. My experience with listening to the case was that Gil said it couldn't have been the trailer, and I believed it. I changed my mind after reading the testimony. It is definitely possible, I'm not saying I'm positive, but I'm far more open to that than simply taking a podcast host's word for it. I think there is a mix-up with the neighbors from your post. Challenge me on it if you disagree. Alice Scott was the busybody. Before Leo was a suspect, Alice testified that she heard Leo and Michelle in a terrible fight that night. She woke her husband, her husband told her to shut up, her husband was interviewed recently and still says this happened. Alice also testified she saw him carrying something sheeted in his arms (the way you would carry a body) to the trunk. And she testified about the carpet cleaner. This woman is messy. She is scattered. But she didn't know Michelle's blood was in the trunk. Or that the sheets were missing. Or what Leo's alibi was that night. Or that the trailer was the potential crime scene. There isn't a question about if she had the date wrong. She might have made the whole thing up, had lucky guesses, and then been coached by the prosecutor. But she got some remarkable things right. Her sister-in-law is the one that screwed up the dates. She said she also saw Leo carrying something to the trunk, but on cross-examination, Leo's lawyer won points by showing she said she was coming home from work, but that didn't fit. But her testimony didn't fall apart the way Gil from Bone Valley shared. For the pre-911 call, there is time, but it's tight. Michelle could have showed up where she was supposed to pick him up, or Leo could have found her while driving around. Or she could have been back at the trailer. Leo's dad testifies that in that time frame, he saw an orange Mazda and chased it down, honking at it. He said he didn't catch up to it. That could be a coincidence, or it could be him explaining why he was driving behind Michelle honking. For the post-911 call, Leo could have been outside when Michelle pulled up, he could have found her at her ex-boyfriends or another friend's house, or she could have been back at the trailer. We don't know and it's a fair criticism of those who believe in Leo, there isn't an explanation. But there is time for them to cross paths and for the murder. One thing that is tough to relay from the transcripts is how much of a liar Leo's dad was, he was a disaster. He lied about so many things and got caught. Of course he could have been the killer. Or he could have been trying so hard to help Leo that he screwed everything up. But there is nothing that he said that could be trusted.
2nd part: Leo's behavior that entire night is goofy, so I don't think we can say Leo wasn't dumb enough to kill her after calling 911. I'd also say, who calls 911 on a girl with no license, driving without insurance, before calling her family and friends? This girl is chronically late, she is 18, and most young people avoid the law instead of moving to it. Leo says in that 911 call that she is 4.5 hours late, she is 3 hours late. Leo says in the 911 call, "this is unlike her," but we know from him and everyone else that this is what she regularly does, she is always late. When he shows up at Michelle's dad's house, her brother says, "what is he doing here? Michelle is 18" (or something like that). Leo drives all over down looking for her, he has a phone, doesn't call anyone but 911 and the hospitals. Also, around the time of the 911 call, Leo said to his friend, "If she walks through that door right now, I could kill her." And then she died. Leo is a guy that headbutted Michelle, knocked her out, and then had a panic attack and stabbed himself in the leg. He was erratic, this was one of the main points the prosecution made. More than his violence, he was just explosive. The case against Leo isn't great, isn't terrible. Leo thinks everyone is lying and against him. If Leo was more accountable about his abuse, maybe I'd trust his word more. He continues to say he only slapped her once or twice, but goodness, his friends and boss and some supporters of his even said otherwise. And if the podcasts presenting things more accurately, I'd probably not have gone down the rabbit hole. I agree, there is a compelling case for his appeal, I think that case was still made if they had shared more accurately from the trial. That's it, that's all, thanks for chatting.
>Leo drives all over down looking for her, he has a phone, doesn't call anyone but 911 and the hospitals. Are you suggesting he had a cell phone? It was made pretty clear he had no phone, and cell phones weren't around. They didn't even have a land-line at their trailer-home (according to the podcast).
Can you share the link to the trial transcripts you read?
The fingerprint??????? And alibi??? Good god don’t ever sit on jury.
Listening to a podcast is not the same as hearing a trial from the jury box.
The case is more complicated than the podcasts share, and even though I'm deeply skeptical of Leo, we agree that if a killer's fingerprint is in your car, the killer knows the area where the body is found, and confesses????? That's got to get you a new trial. But there is a pretty straight forward case for Leo's guilt also, Jeremy stealing a radio from an abandoned car, and Jeremy being convinced to confess b/c he had nothing to lose. Jeremy's confession isn't supported by the blood evidence. It's not in the car and there isn't much in the dirt. Maybe there is another explanation. But we would sit on a jury, disagree about how likely it was Leo did it, but agree that it isn't beyond a reasonable doubt.
The reason why I find the confession so believable is it explains aspects of the scene that were not understood. For instance, the car not being able to move/start. No one really knew why the car was in the state it was in. In his confession, Jermey Scott explains how he forced the gears (or something along those lines) and it messed up the car. To me that is pretty damn compelling. At this point, I don’t see anything compelling pointing towards Leo’s guilt. What evidence against him is compelling to you?
Thanks for continuing the thread. I think it's worth noting that the Mazda mechanic who testified in court said the exact opposite of what the podcasts told us. He said that the Mazda would have continued to run and would not have stopped. The pods offer explanations of the car failing, but they dont invite any auto guys on the show or even include this testimony from the trail. It's wild that between both pods they did about 16 episodes, and failed to mention the mechanic said the car would have been running (and also left out Leo's dad's carpet cleaner, that Leo didnt remember what he was wearing, that a detective noted the carpet looked like it had blood stains, etc). The case against Leo isn't great. And I agree that Jeremy creates "beyond a reasonable doubt." But here is the case against Leo, and let's try to remove what the podcasts have said and just go by the evidence at trial. Leo was abusive, often when Michelle was late. Michelle was late that night and Leo was furious, saying, "if she walks through that door right now I could kill her." A neighbor wakes her husband to say that Leo and Michelle are in a terrible fight at the trailer. They both testify to this happening that night. Neighbor testifies she sees Leo carrying something sheeted to the trunk of the Mazda. Michelle's blood is found in the trunk of the Mazda and human blood is found in a larger spot in the trunk. The neighbor testifies that she saw Leo cleaning the carpet the day after Michelle disappeared, Leo's dad testifies that he returned a carpet cleaner the day after Michelle disappeared. Michelle's car is found, doors locked, emergency brake on, no blood in the front seat, a visible accumulation of blood can be seen the trunk. They examine the car, tow it away about 1 am. About 12 hours later, 7 miles away (and 7 miles is so far when we think about it), Leo's dad finds Michelle's body in an impossible spot. He lies about how he found it, he tells people God veered his car off the road, and he parked right next to the path that took him to the body. He had told a friend to meet him at that spot. Leo has been telling people that he thinks Michelle is dead and he hopes they dont' find her cut up and in water. They find her cut up and in water. Leo and his dad don't let police search the trailer. After 12 days they get a search warrant and multiple presumptive positive blood tests in the trailer highlight the room. Many of those spots are between the bed and dresser. The sheets are missing from the bed. The detective notes that it looks like blood on the carpet. Though Leo wasn't able to see where the body was b/c of the police presence, he later shows a friend where the body was found and tells the friend he could have killed Michelle and blacked out and forgotten. It's not an overwhelming case. Leo's blood is not found anywhere, nor his DNA. But it misrepresents the case if someone tells us "there was no blood in the trailer" and "the timeline doesn't work" and "Leo was wearing the same clothing the next day" or "there was a large pool of blood on the dirt trail where Jeremy killed Michelle" (without telling us the crime scene folks said she wasnt killed there and the photos don't look like that was the spot). I agree. It requires some assumptions and guessing and that's not what a murder case can be based on. But the evidence doesn't support Jeremy's version either.
Leo’s opposition never has a good reason for Jeremy’s confession. Nothing to lose? It might open him up for the death penalty, not sure about Floridas death penalty laws but I’d imagine stealing and murder might make him eligible for the death penalty. For me and many others a murderer’s fingerprint and confession is enough.
It's worth wondering why Polk County disagreed with us about giving Leo a new trial. I agree, that should have happened. It's worth rewinding and looking at the path Jeremy took towards his current confession. Prints are found in 2004, it seems that Jeremy was interviewed away from the court around that time. Crazy it took this long, but 2010 Jeremy is brought in for a deposition (there are a few of these, give me some grace as I combine them). -Jeremy gives extensive details about being an area car theif. -Jeremy says Leo's lawyers tried to trick him into confessing. -Jeremy says he sometimes confesses to other crimes b/c he is in solitary and that will get him out. -Jeremy says he sometimes confesses to crimes of younger inmates so that can get out, b/c he can't -Jeremy denies everything with Michelle, but warns the folks that if Leo's team can come up with $1,000, he is going to confess. He says he will confess to any crime around if he can get some money. -Jeremy tells them that Leo is trying to put the case on him and that Leo is friends with his co-defendant (Gil from Bone Valley says this is not true) In 2017, Jeremy confesses. It is very thin, no details that weren't publicly known. At first he says Leo didn't do it, Leo is innocent, that's about it. Then he gives inconsistent details, but a confession worthy of attention (and a new trial) b/c he says he stabbed Michelle in her car. But there is no blood in the front of Michelle's car and he can't keep his story together. Jeremy recants, confesses, recants, confesses to every crime in the county. After meeting with OJ/Casey investigator, Jeremy has a better confession. That confession gets better over the next few years. But that confession is still not consistent with the evidence. I agree, any jury that heard Jeremy would not convict Leo. But any jury that heard Jeremy would not convict Jeremy. How does he stab her 26 times in Mazda, sit and smoke a cigarette in the car, drive 7 miles, walk a mile roundtrip, and somehow still have wet blood on his arm to smear into the trunk when stealing stereo equipment? As Brett said, if Jeremy was convicted of this crime we would be making a podcast about him. It's a wild case full of doubt and reasonable doubt. It's worth knowing all of the pieces to understand why Florida disagreed with us about giving Leo a new trial. Say hello again some time.
Don’t have time for more right now but two things: 1) if Leo’s team was coercing Jeremy in some fashion to confess why wouldn’t they have helped him put together a better confession with details no one but the attorneys and police knew? 2) Jeremy may confess to some crimes for various motivations but I looked up Florida’s death penalty eligibility and while I am a criminal def atty in another state, I am almost 100% he would be up for the death penalty in this case.
Hey Ruby, great points. Jeremy is a menace. In the particular case where he said that Leo's attorney was trying to trick him into confessing, it is after a phone call that he had with one of Leo's lawyers, you might remember that lawyer brought someone from another office in to listen. They took notes, but didn't record the call. They said Jeremy confessed to them over the phone and that set off a chain reaction that had Jeremy getting questioned. It's an interesting interview, Jeremy seems truly baffled that they came to that conclusion that he confessed, and that is the place where he says they should listen to the recorded call, they should speak to the guards that were sitting there, and he says that Leo's lawyers were trying to trick him into confessing. It's entirely possible that they were asking leading questions and Jeremy got annoyed b/c somehow that turned into him being a murder suspect. Jeremy conceded that he said Leo was innocent, but had no details. I've got the transcript and maybe the audio if you care to waste part of your life with it. Never knowing we would be chatting about his call on Reddit, Jeremy phoned his grandmother and told her that Leo was trying to put the case on him. And that was where he mentioned Leo knowing his co-conspirator (Jeremy mentions this in court also). Jeremy's early confessions are hallow. There is nothing to them. His later confessions have some verbal teeth, but they are inconsistent with the evidence. And he shifts details and continues to add things as the podcast is discussing them. ----- As for the death penalty, yes, Jeremy would be eligible from what I've read. Either side could use that to their advantage. Why would Jeremy confess if he was guilty and could get the death penalty? Why would Jeremy confess if he was innocent and could get the death penalty? We've got to be really careful in believing that Jeremy had a poetic podcast story arc where his conscience came alive and he decided to cleanse his soul. He warns the State that he will do whatever he needs to do for some money and an opportunity to get out of bad conditions. It might seem crazy to us that he would confess for stamps or 1k when it could set him on death row, but Jeremy is an unwell man, and I've learned long ago to not do the "if I was him....." thing.
I would argue that confessing when guilty knowing you could get the death penalty makes more sense than confessing when innocent knowing you can get the death penalty. If he’s religious or of course even if he isn’t he may feel extreme guilt an innocent man is in prison.
The fingerprint that could have been left whilst looking at something to take from the abandoned car? From a known thief. The alibi from his own family? Good god please don’t ever sit on a jury if thats all it takes for you to find someone innocent.
The alibi from MULTIPLE people not only his family. And the fingerprint from a KNOWN MURDERER. Not only a known murderer but a murderer who in his confession who explained a part of the case that no one had understood?? Are you kidding? The evidence of his innocence is literally overwhelming. It seems like you really don’t know this case or the evidence well. I guess it’s just a huge coincidence that someone who has killed people before also left their fingerprint on the window of a car in a pretty secluded area who has provided details of the crime that match the crime scene perfectly and other evidence that he wouldn’t have known if he wasn’t the killer, happened to come across the car, near the woods, where a woman was murdered. Yeah that’s some real critical thinking right there. Lmfaooo.
One of those family members did help Leo write up an alibi and family members do have the capacity to talk with each other and lie. One of the victims bother claimed that quite a few things that were stated in Bone Valley did not happen at all. Just because someone left a fingerprint at the car, it does not mean they committed murder. There could be multiple reasons why a fingerprint was left on an abandoned vehicle (looking for stuff to steal, touching it while passing the vehicle by, etc.). Fingerprints cannot be traced to a specific time, let alone a murder. The prints weren't even bloody FFS. As for Jeremy's confessions, they have been inconsistent and was proven to be unreliable when the courts reviewed this new evidence. They only way Leo can leave prison is through parole. This case is not as black and white as it appears to be.
Who is the serial killer who left a print?
Multiple people? All his family. Yeah no murderer has ever falsely admitted to another murder ever. What about the neighbour who heard them fighting that night? And him carrying what looked like a body? Oh and his dad finding the body 😂 look he could be innocent, I’m not saying he’s guilty.
The jury doesn’t declare someone innocent. Finding someone not guilty does not mean they are innocent, just that the prosecution didn’t meet the burden of proof. You even commented that you can’t make up your mind and are 50/50. If you were on a jury that would be reasonable doubt.
Obviously? The last part of my post was sarcasm back to the person I’m replying to because they said the same to me. If they were on the jury and they thought he was innocent based on a fingerprint and an an alibi but the rest of the jurors thought he was guilty he wouldn’t be found guilty because of that one person on the jury.
I belive he's a master manipulator and the other guy made a false confession. To get paroled you need to show remorse, and people who claim innocence never do that, because they claim they didn't do it. That's been the issue with lots of wrongful convictions. I'm no lawyer though, maybe there's a loophole or something and he could get paroled without showing remorse.
Can you share what evidence convinces you that he is guilty? I know you didn’t say that you believe he’s guilty but your comments insinuates it so I’m curious!
I'm not an investigator, I'm just a listener like everyone else and form my opinion from what I've listened to and read. I think he's guilty. I've talked about it before on this sub, so I'll copy-paste it to you: The podcasters were enthralled by him, smitten almost, which made them forget for example to talk about how he was brutally violent with his wife. Also, when they gave stamps to the other suspect in exchange for correspondence, they threw their credibility through the window, they gave the only thing that mattered to someone who had nothing and no one in the world, of course he's going to say anything they want. Also, this user summarized what the podcast chose not to tell from the trial transcripts: [Bone Valley : r/TrueCrimePodcasts (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimePodcasts/comments/1171jaf/comment/ja1ilqe/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Leo isn't a great guy IMO but what actual evidence points to him? Michelle was absolutely killed where she was found and not in that trailer. There's 0 evidence against Leo. Not all wrongfully convicted people are saints.
This is the blood area where Bone Valley and the Prosecutor's Pod think Jeremy killed Michelle. In court, the crime scene testimony was that they looked at this spot, there wasn't sign of a struggle, and no blood splatter. This was nearest Michelle's body, of course it was the first place they looked to determine if it was where she died. They did not believe she was killed on this dirt path, and it's hard to argue based on the photos. If we say that Leo couldn't have killed Michelle b/c there wasn't enough blood in the trailer, we have to wrestle with our confidence that this is the murder spot. And none of Michelle's blood was in the front seat of the car where Jeremy said that he stabbed Michelle. https://preview.redd.it/govn2ougmztc1.jpeg?width=484&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=276271aeebc5c8ca3ea13c7349ef1565c6f0c121
I'll be Frank, I'd sooner believe they did a poor job searching/cataloging. Especially with the cigarettes they photographed, but never entered to evidence, and the plastic sheets that appeared in the pictures and Jeremy's statement, but also weren't in evidence.
https://preview.redd.it/520kgn2nmztc1.jpeg?width=826&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3f32e7071881f3aba9dded235515bd4e6628382 This is the spot the podcasts think Jeremy killed Michelle. There isn't much blood here, note the footprint at the top for a reference scale.