Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Let us examine the evidence

There is so much evidence in this case that it would seem that a positive identification of the murderer would be an easy task. Yet, none of the physical evidence in this case points toward the man incarcerated for the crime. How do we (as a system of justice) find the person(s) whom the physical evidence does reveal? What evidence can be used?
Posted by in 16:31:38

131 Responses to “Let us examine the evidence”

  1. weight loss says:

    I not to mention my friends appeared to be digesting the excellent strategies on your web site and so unexpectedly developed a horrible suspicion I never thanked the site owner for those strategies. All the people are actually absolutely thrilled to learn all of them and have actually been taking advantage of those things. Appreciate your truly being very considerate and for pick out this kind of decent subject areas millions of individuals are really desperate to discover. My very own honest apologies for not expressing gratitude to sooner.

  2. Thanks a lot for giving everyone such a superb chance to discover important secrets from this website. It really is so enjoyable and also jam-packed with a great time for me personally and my office co-workers to visit your site particularly three times in one week to learn the newest issues you have got. Not to mention, I am actually contented considering the wonderful advice served by you. Certain 3 points in this posting are definitely the best we have ever had.

  3. All of these perplexing motherboard repairs are preformed by our soldering personnel at a different location, this is the one thing that our Lake Park mail-in center wont touch. The equipment involved is very very perplexing and it can only be operated by experienced specialists. We do not suggest that you ever try this type of repair at home, nor do we encourage that you trust this type of task to anyone else.

  4. Paytm coupons, Paytm active coupons, Paytm promo code – http://www.couponcargo.in/store/paytmcoupons

  5. coupons says:

    This really is incredibly legitimate aspect as increased within the blog. Value writing about in and around.

  6. coupons says:

    This can be surprisingly real issue as elevated within the journal. Take pleasure in making reference to in and around.

  7. This is certainly rather real spot as heightened into the blog site. Admire discussing about all around.

  8. You are a very bright person!

  9. I simply wanted to appreciate you again. I’m not certain the things I might have gone through without the tricks documented by you over that subject matter. It was an absolute frightening circumstance in my view, nevertheless noticing the well-written fashion you resolved that made me to jump with joy. I’m just happier for the work and thus trust you really know what a great job you are always putting in teaching some other people through your blog. I am sure you haven’t got to know all of us.

  10. Good write-up, I am normal visitor of one¡¦s site, maintain up the excellent operate, and It is going to be a regular visitor for a lengthy time.

  11. I appreciate you for viewing my excess write up for even a great deal more just look at us younique 3d mascara

  12. I like the way you conduct your posts. Have a nice Thursday!

  13. Thanks for all your work on this web site. Betty enjoys getting into investigation and it’s really obvious why. Most people hear all of the powerful form you create good ideas on your website and foster contribution from some others on this article and my daughter is actually being taught so much. Enjoy the rest of the year. You’re the one conducting a fantastic job.

  14. Lane Hearns says:

    I keep listening to the news broadcast lecture about getting boundless online grant applications so I have been looking around for the finest site to get one. Could you tell me please, where could i find some?

  15. Hi, I do believe this is a great blog. I stumbledupon it ;) I’m going to revisit once again since i have book-marked it. Money and freedom is the greatest way to change, may you be rich and continue to help others.

  16. Alene Kirgan says:

    I cant believe youre not more popular because you definitely have the gift.

  17. A big thank you for your post.Really thank you! Cool.

  18. Thanks for sharing, this is a fantastic blog.Really thank you! Keep writing.

  19. sales tools says:

    Really enjoyed this blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Will read on…

  20. Beneficial document helps make frequent advance, appreciate it write about, this pile-up connected with expertise is usually to hold finding out, focus is usually the beginning of money.

  21. A round of applause for your article. Really Cool.

  22. Hey there, I feel your blog may be having browser compatibility issues. When I look at your website in Safari, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping. I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that, superb weblog!

  23. Madeline says:

    Very great read. I liked the article! Great occupation.

  24. I just couldn’t depart your website prior to suggesting that I extremely loved the usual info a person supply for your guests? Is going to be back incessantly to check out new posts.

  25. Girls Games says:

    Wow, great post.Thanks Again. Much obliged.

  26. I value the blog article.Thanks Again. Will read on…

  27. UGG Boots says:

    I couldn’t show too much various information on this piece of content, so it was easy to discover his one. I will get back again to look at another postings that you have next time.

  28. Wow, I enjoyed your neat post.

  29. Anonymous says:

    I would not buy a pair of UGLY boots even if they were free. Get off this website.

  30. Anonymous says:

    madhuri no they’ve conveniently “misplaced” it; there’s also a signed chain of custody at the time of trial for slides that Melinkoff handed them over to John McCann the Roosevelt County Prosecutor at the time of trial who conveniently is Teresa Day O’Connor’s “Uncle” I believe; who was conveniently called into the BOPP hearing even though she was a “substitute’ to Chair the hearing? AND fell asleep during the hearing? She was asked to step down for bias and refused. Hope this helps!

  31. madhuri says:

    Has the State of Montana actually “lost” evidence in this case? I think I read that on this website somewhere, but it seems hard to believe..

  32. Montanans for Justice says:

    See updates

    go to latest news


    Petition For Writ of Supervisory Control
    Barry’s attorneys have petitioned the Montana Supreme Court to allow all new evidence to be considered and to allow Barry his right to discovery prior to the August 1st hearing.

    Petition For Writ of Supervisory Control Table of Authorities
    Table of Authorities for above petition.

  33. Anonymous says:

    The people of Montana should DEMAND that Maude Greyhawk Kirn answer to the Court as to why she didn’t appear at the last hearing…she should have to answer to her involvement in the murder as well as a few others. Like the FBI said, the owner of the bloody palmprint is the killer! It’s all going to come out soon!

  34. LadyBear says:

    Latest from the Fort Peck Journal (words and talk are stirring up in Poplar Montana and surrounding areas) We love you Barry !!

    Beach’s attorneys appeal to the Montana Supreme Court
    Louis Montclair

    Attorneys for Barry Beach filed for a petition to keep an upcoming evidentiary hearing in Roosevelt County and to introduce new evidence into the hearing that might possibly exonerate Beach.

    Terrance Toavs, one of Beach’s attorneys, filed a petition for writ of supervisory control with the Montana Supreme Court. Peter Camiel, one of Beach’s attorneys, said that the writ filed has three purposes: to keep the hearing in Roosevelt County, to allow new evidence to be introduced into the case, and to ask to allow the defense to engage in discovery.

    The writ was filed today (April 6, 2011) but Camiel said that does not know when the Montana Supreme Court will respond. It could take a few weeks to a few months, he said.

    Camiel said that the state has been trying to make this evidentiary hearing as difficult as possible. He said that the state of Montana has a conviction for the murder of Kim Nees and they don’t want to admit that they held a guy for 25 years for a murder he didn’t commit.

    Beach was convicted of the 1979 murder of Kim Nees, who was found in the Poplar River. The murder was unsolved for years until Beach was arrested in Louisiana and, under intense interrogation, confessed to the murder. He was sentenced to 100 years without the possibility of parole.

    Since his conviction, Beach has maintained his innocence. He filed a petition for post-pardon relief based on evidence that was not present at the time of the original trial.

    In 2010, Beach was granted an evidentiary hearing, which is not the same as a trial. Camiel said that this hearing will be to determine if there is enough evidence to warrant a new trial for Beach.

    However, the state has been working to keep Beach behind bars, and the writ filed is the latest attempt by Beach’s attorneys to get him exonerated from prison.

    Court documents state that a writ is necessary to prevent the gross miscarriage of justice that would occur if the state is allowed to have their way in this case. The state is trying to proceed with an evidentiary hearing which excludes the additional new evidence gathered by Beach since January 2008, occurs without any pre-hearing discovery, and requires subpoenaing witnesses to Fergus County where venue is not proper and where none of the witnesses reside.

    In January 2008, Beach filed a petition for post-conviction relief based on newly discovered evidence not available at the original trial. The petition was denied an appealed. On November 4, 2009, the petition was granted.

    Since the appeal, additional evidence was found and more witnesses have come forward with testimony. Camiel said that if this evidence were introduced at the original trial, then he believes the jury would have returned with a not guilty verdict.

    Court documents state that Beach’s attorneys and lawyers for the State of Montana held a scheduling conference on October 15, 2010, where the District Court inquired to whether the parties objected to moving the hearing to Fergus County. Beach objected, and the District Court set the hearing for Roosevelt County.

    On December 12, the District Court issued an order changing the location of the evidentiary hearing to Fergus County.


    According to court papers, this case meets the requirements for the exercise of supervisory control. Urgency exists because Beach is currently wrongfully imprisoned, as he has been since 1984. Three vital witnesses have passed away since the petition was filed in January 2008, including Vonnie Brown and Albert “Gooch” Kirn.

    The issues raised in the petition are “purely legal” questions involving application of post conviction state laws, including whether venue for the evidentiary hearing can be moved by the District Court over Beach’s objection. Resolution of this petition does not require this court ot make any factual determinations. The court’s orders implicate Beach’s fundamental constitutional right to due process, are of state wide importance and cast pubic doubt upon the fairness and integrity of Montana’s justice system, documents state.


    Camiel said there is new evidence that the state is trying to keep from being used, including the infamous bloody palm print found at the murder scene.

    At the original trial, the prosecutor said that the palm print came from Nees. However, new evidence discovered by Beach’s attorneys prove that neither Nees or Beach left the palm print, which means that it was left by another person at the scene. The print is in Nees’s blood, and it points to the real murder in the case.

    In addition, at least 30 new witnesses have come forward with testimony that could prove Beach’s innocence. Some witnesses have come forward describing inculpatory statements made by Sissy Atkinson, one of the original suspects in the case, wherein she confessed to being present at or involved in the Nees murder, court documents state.

    Several new witnesses cross corroborate the earlier new evidence given by Jack Atkinson, Vonnie Brown, Carl Four Star, and Dun O’Connor regarding inculpatory statements made by Sissy Atkinson. They also independently support the reliability of Shitty Atkinson’s third-party confessions.

    The additional new evidence discovered by Beach since the filing of his original petition in January, 2008 both corroborates the other new evidence discovered by Beach and provides direct factual support for the proposition Beach did not kill Nees.

    “This new evidence puts flesh on circumstantial bones of this case,” states the writ.

    Error in discovery

    According to the writ, the court erred in denying Beach’s discovery motion.

    Beach filed a motion for leave to conduct discovery on June 8, 2010. His motion outlined the matters he wished to pursue, which include finding the owner of the bloody palm print, depose key witnesses who refuse to give statements, and locate the misplaced forensic evidence for DNA analysis, including the victim’s sweater and numerous biological slides. The District Court has denied Beach’s motion to conduct discovery, stating that any new evidence discovery would be premature. Beach’s attorneys argue that they have demonstrated good cause. He has pursued the missing physical evidence through voluntary interviews without success, unsuccessfully attempted to enlist the cooperation of law enforcement agencies in running comparisons of the unidentified bloody palm print, and hired investigators to attempt to interview numerous uncooperative witnesses.

    If this is granted, then Beach’s attorneys would be able to depose witnesses that have been uncooperative and refused to speak. There are about eight to 12 people that refuse to talk – Maude Grey Hawk Kirn, another suspect, being one of them.

  35. Anonymous says:

    In response to Anomynous says:March 24, 2011 at 2:57 PM
    #61 – It has been said in other blogs that Sissy has Kim’s necklace.

    I believe it’s been said that Sissy has Kim’s CLASS KEY and has shown it to individuals.

  36. Anomynous says:

    #61 – It has been said in other blogs that Sissy has Kim’s necklace.

  37. Montanans for Justice says:

    I always called him, “The Great Mr. Lowney. “

    With great sorrow, and joy, I regret to inform you that “The Great Mr. Doug Lowney” passed away Saturday the 13th of November, at around four O’clock PM. He died peacefully with friends and family present at St Peters Hospital in Helena Montana.

    Please pray for Doug and his family, in this time of need. His daughter Ann, said she will post the time and date of services to this web site, when it becomes available.
    You can go to
    for more information.

    Doug was very involved with the Beach case, and Montanan’s For Justice. He was part of our “Core group” of Montanan’s For Justice.

    As Doug always said, “We have an AWESOME God!!”
    Father Porter in Deer Lodge said two Mass’s with the inmates at Montana State Prison, for Doug at or around the hour of his death.
    A group of Men, at a Cursillo weekend, in East Helena were saying the rosary for Doug at or around the hour of his death.
    A group of Men doing a Cursillo weekend in the Shelby Prison have been praying for Doug.
    Doug would have said, “Don’t we just have an AWESOME God”.
    Yes Doug, We do Have an Awesome God, and thank you God, for Blessing us with your true and faithful servant Doug Lowney.

    Your Friend
    Bob Kolar

  38. Montanans for Justice says:

    Montanans For Justice implores anyone with information about the Kim Nees murder to call the toll-free Montanans For Justice TipLine at 1-877-884-8507.

    The TipLine is being actively monitored. Your message will be heard only by Barry’s legal team. If your information is relevant, substantive, and credible, someone from the legal team will contact you if you choose to leave your contact information. Barry’s attorneys will keep your information and identity in strictest confidence. Your information and identity will be revealed only if YOU choose to testify. Even if you do not wish to testify, your confidential information might help Barry’s legal team put the pieces together more effectively to prove his innocence.

    Since the Montana Supreme Court’s decision to order an evidentiary hearing in the Beach case, several new witnesses have come forward to testify, including individuals who have come to Barry’s legal team through the TipLine. There is safety in numbers and as this case comes to a head, it is increasingly safe to step forward with what you know.

  39. Sharon says:

    I’d like to thank Kay Rossi for another report.


  40. Sharon says:

    In the Great Falls Tribune an article that an associate of Sissy Atkinson, Kevin Hall and his wife Tamara heard Sissy confess to her participation in Kim Nees murder. He reported this to the Great Falls police department on several occassions as early as 2006. Sissy Atkinson testified she did live in Great Falls and all information coiencides with documented statements from other parties.

    Go read for yourself as I hope MFJ will post the link. greatfallstribune.com/article/20091220/NEWS01/912200303/Couple-says-woman-admitted-playing-role-in-79-Poplar-killing-at-center-of-Beach-case

    Great job John S. Adams for reporting the story!! It’s about time!!!!

  41. Sharon says:

    The Dunwell Report with representatives of Montanans for Justice can be found under the latest news!

    Great job Bob Kolar, Frank Crowley, and Dan Gingler!!

  42. Sharon says:

    To anyone with any knowledge of the Barry Beach case in
    Wolf Point or Poplar I urge to please contact the
    Montana For Justice tip line toll free: 1-877-884-8507

    All calls are kept confidential!

  43. Fort Pecks Day says:

    In the ways of our people judgement comes in the form of a
    whirlwind. As the winds begin to blow isn’t it amazing
    that just as Barry Beach gets a brand new opportunity to
    try and match the unmatched fingerprints and the bloody
    palm print that the recent actions of the Big Muddy Task
    Force have gathered 36 new fingerprints to possibly be

    The whirlwind seems to be getting closer.

  44. Sharon says:

    Here’s the links to Barry’s latest interview on KRTV.COM
    hot off the press!

    %20Beach%3A%20Murder%20In%20Poplar&vt1=v&at1=Station 4&d1=
    172267&LaunchPageAdTag=Station 4&activePane=info&rnd=

    20with%20Barry%20Beach&vt1=v&at1=Station 4&d1=1946833&
    LaunchPageAdTag=Station 4&activePane=info&rnd=74206658

  45. Anonymous says:

    For those of you who still follow the Barry Beach story there will be a televised interview Wednesday, November 11, 2009 with Barry and his mother Roberta, on KRTV Channel 3 Great Falls. You can also see the interview on the KRTV website at KRTV.COM

    Thanks for your support and prayers

  46. cucumber says:

    You are so clever, and also so naughty.

  47. Websites like yours are an excellent source of information for new and experienced users alike.

  48. i cant understand……

  49. Anonymous says:

    WOW, good post!

  50. Anonymous says:

    It seems to me that the wrong person is on trial in Montana. To have this happen to someone is an indictment of Montana’s government officials who are refusing to confronting wrong doing, refusing to protect the citizens of Montana from injustice. If we vote these people back into office we get what we deserve! What we really have right now is nothing more than moral degradation, as demonstrated by the apathy and weak willed moral mongrels claiming to represent our best interests while allowing innocent people to languish in prison, where they willingly consign people to conditions they ought to be ashamed of in a supposedly civilized society. The sick thing is they know Barry is innocent!
    Thanks to all who are choosing to be heard and are protesting this offencive condition, this stink eminating from our ‘government’…of the people, by the people, for the people, Amen!

  51. Anonymous says:


    Barry Beach Presentation

    Sunday, August 10, 2008
    2:30 pm, Glasgow Fairgrounds
    This is not an MFJ event,
    but MFJ members will be attending.
    Please join us if you can!

    Breakfast at the Cottonwood Hotel
    Sunday, August 10, 2008, 9:00 am
    Flyers will be handed out after breakfast.

    The Cottonwood Hotel

    The Star Motel

    Contact Montanans For Justice E-mail for more information.


  52. Beth says:

    After briefly going over some of the evidence, I have noticed that no one seems to bring up the urine spots found at the crime scene. During the time frame of when this murder occured, could any testing have been done on it?? If so, wouldn’t that information help to clarify who might have been there during that time?

  53. Anonymous says:

    Montanans For Justice has no problem with anyone referring to documents posted on our website: http://www.montanansforjustice.com. However, we cannot allow people to cut and paste large documents that are already available on the website. You may try posting links to these documents in your comment or you may refer to them by name and location. MFJ has removed 1 document from this post that is too large to be posted here. Please keep your comments as comments, not regurgitation of documents that MFJ has already provided. Thank you for your cooperation. MFJ

  54. Anonymous says:

    Watch the Barry Beach rally at the State Capitol Building in Helena, MT on the ‘Latest News’ page of the MFJ website. Also, please print off the petition that can be found there as well and get them signed and mailed back to MFJ. Thanks to everyone.

  55. Anonymous says:

    Barry Beach Rally Itinerary

    Montana Capitol Rally!!!

    May 9-10, 2008

    Everyone is welcome. Please come if you can!


    Friday. May 9, 2008

    7:00 – 8:00 p.m. – Meet at Perkins Restaurant, 1803 Cedar Street, 406-442-5757
    Dinner with Richard Hepburn; Richard is Centurion Ministries’ primary investigator for the Barry Beach case.

    Saturday. May 10, 2008

    9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. – Make posters for rally; hand out flyers around town, place
    flyers on cars. Location will depend on weather; call Montanans for Justice Phone 406-465-6761 for location.

    12:00 – 1:30 p.m. – Sack Lunch (you bring) at Lockey Park. Take the Capital Street
    Exit, when traveling west on Prospect Ave turn South (left) on Lamborn Street, travel 5 to 6 blocks you will run into Lockey Park. This park is close to the Capital Complex and is boarded by Broadway Street and Lockey Ave and Lamborn Street.

    1:30 – 2:00 p.m. – Assemble on the front steps of the Montana State Capitol building.

    2:00 – 3:00 p.m. – Justice for Barry Beach” rally.

    Pre opening–warm up the crowd with some songs
    2pm Opening Comments Ziggy Ziegler Former Yellowstone County Commissioner.
    2:05 Invocation Father Porter MSP chaplain.
    2:07 Review of the Case Doug Lowney Treasurer for Montanans for Justice.
    2:14 Centurion Ministries Richard Hepburn, Centurion Ministries’ primary investigator.
    2:24 Montana Senator Dan Weinberg from Whitefish.
    2:34 Who is Barry Beach Barry’s mom Bobby Clincher.
    and sister Barbra Barbara Salinda.
    2:44 Call to Action Bob Kolar, Spokesman Montanans for Justice.
    2:55 Closing prayer Father Porter MSP chaplain.
    2:57 Closing Comments Ziggy Ziegler Former Yellowstone County Commissioner.

    3:00 p.m. -? – Discussion on Barry Beach’s Case (Open to the Public) and Dinner/Lunch at Jorgenson’s Restaurant, Back Room 1720 11th Ave (Close to Capital).

    Thank you for coming.

  56. Anonymous says:

    Barry Beach Rally Itinerary

    Montana Capitol Rally!!!

    May 9-10, 2008

    Everyone is welcome. Please come if you can!


    Friday. May 9, 2008

    7:00 – 8:00 p.m. – Meet at Perkins Restaurant, 1803 Cedar Street, 406-442-5757
    Dinner with Richard Hepburn; Richard is Centurion Ministries’ primary investigator for the Barry Beach case.

    Saturday. May 10, 2008

    9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. – Make posters for rally; hand out flyers around town, place
    flyers on cars. Location will depend on weather; call Montanans for Justice Phone 406-465-6761 for location.

    12:00 – 1:30 p.m. – Sack Lunch (you bring) at Lockey Park. Take the Capital Street
    Exit, when traveling west on Prospect Ave turn South (left) on Lamborn Street, travel 5 to 6 blocks you will run into Lockey Park. This park is close to the Capital Complex and is boarded by Broadway Street and Lockey Ave and Lamborn Street.

    1:30 – 2:00 p.m. – Assemble on the front steps of the Montana State Capitol building.

    2:00 – 3:00 p.m. – Justice for Barry Beach” rally.

    Pre opening–warm up the crowd with some songs
    2pm Opening Comments Ziggy Ziegler Former Yellowstone County Commissioner.
    2:05 Invocation Father Porter MSP chaplain.
    2:07 Review of the Case Doug Lowney Treasurer for Montanans for Justice.
    2:14 Centurion Ministries Richard Hepburn, Centurion Ministries’ primary investigator.
    2:24 Montana Senator Dan Weinberg from Whitefish.
    2:34 Who is Barry Beach Barry’s mom Bobby Clincher.
    and sister Barbra Barbara Salinda.
    2:44 Call to Action Bob Kolar, Spokesman Montanans for Justice.
    2:55 Closing prayer Father Porter MSP chaplain.
    2:57 Closing Comments Ziggy Ziegler Former Yellowstone County Commissioner.

    3:00 p.m. -? – Discussion on Barry Beach’s Case (Open to the Public) and Dinner/Lunch at Jorgenson’s Restaurant, Back Room 1720 11th Ave (Close to Capital).

    Thank you for coming.

  57. Anonymous says:

    #72 – was Maude paid to go to the trial? That wouldn’t make sense at all. You can’t buy a witness! (by law I should say)

    I agree that the palm print is the answer to alot of this. That palm print belongs to somebody. I think they need to investigate that further. Why they are not raises questions as well. Even the FBI said the palm print was left by the “unsub” How many law enforcements today would love to have a bloody palm print like that!

    However, we do not know what Centurion is doing. They can’t play thier cards on this blog for everyone to see, so have FAITH and patience and PRAY that they are doing what everyone on this blog thinks is so obvious – get the palm printed tested!

    The answer will lie in that palm print! You find out who that belongs to – you question him/her and you will find your answers! No doubt about it!

  58. Anonymous says:

    Maude was the one who didnt go to the trial; what did she do with the money she was given to go?? Did she give it back? She wasnt on Dateline declaring her innocence. She certainly seems to have something to hide.

  59. Anonymous says:

    Centurion does not have the power to obtain anything from anyone who does not willingly cooperate. People like Maude who were not originally tested have not cooperated with Centurion’s investigators. Something to hide? YES! A court can order these people to give samples, but you have to find a court willing to give that order. Either the AG’s office needs to reopen the case and get them on their own or we need a court who thinks there may be others involved. That is how we can get them tested.

  60. Anonymous says:

    To my knowledge Centurion does not have the power to get the prints tested. The only one that can do that and access the fingerprint system is a police officer and not all of them can even do this. A court order is another way to get it done. So how do we get it done? That is the question of the day. So Sad.

  61. Anonymous says:

    If there are so many fingerprints and a bloody palm print then WHY haven’t ALL those that were believed to be at this party given samples, and have them ALL tested. Most certainly Centurion has the power to obtain them.

  62. Anonymous says:

    #64 – how do you know that Judge C doesn’t think Barry is guilty? If he didn’t think he was guilty then WHY would he give Barry 100 years without parole. After all the attorneys can give recommendations for sentencing but it is the Judge who actually gave him that. Was he paid off by Marc Racicot or the Nees family?

  63. Anonymous says:

    A post earlier questioned about authority over different groups. The FBI has jurisdiction over Native Americans when it comes to murders and things like that on the reservation. I understand that the Roosevelt County police investigated at that time. I think because she was a white person. There is even articles in the Gazette about jurisdiction from May 4. I remember when I was in high school a program was taped about jurisdictional issues and the troubles of having all these different entities for tribal members and whites. This is because we have city officers for Wolf Point and Poplar. Roosevelt County Deputies for the county which stretches from W.P. to the North Dakota border. Then you have the Fort Peck Tribal Police that encompasses the reservation. These officers now have an agreement together that makes them cross-deputized, or to have arresting powers over every person, but they would just go to their respective jails.

  64. Montanans for Justice says:

    Montanans For Justice does not condone or endorse any attacks on the Nees family or the people of Poplar, MT. Our goal is the freedom of Barry Beach. We will attempt to censor comments that are blatantly offensive to readers concerning either of those parties, although we are not in the practice of inhibiting free speech. We ask everyone involved to focus your comments on how we achieve freedom for Barry. Thank you for your understanding. MFJ

  65. Montanans for Justice says:

    Montanans For Justice does not condone or endorse any attacks on the Nees family or the people of Poplar, MT. Our goal is the freedom of Barry Beach. We will attempt to censor comments that are blatantly offensive to readers concerning either of those parties, although we are not in the practice of inhibiting free speech. We ask everyone involved to focus your comments on how we achieve freedom for Barry. Thank you for your understanding. MFJ

  66. Anonymous says:

    if Barry’s lawyers cannot make these socalled people give there finger prints ….than WHO CAN???????also judge C. doesnt think he is guilty either.

  67. Montanans for Justice says:


  68. Anonymous says:

    your in my prayers good person!may you rest easy now…….you did the right thing!

  69. Anonymous says:

    wrote a letter to the lawyer what happened then

  70. Anonymous says:

    So #58— are you going to the FBI or dome one with the information you ahve or are you going to sit on it like everybody else and let this innocent man suffer?????????

  71. Montanans for Justice says:

    Montana Capital Rally!!!

    May 10, 2008 2pm

    Capital Steps, Helena, MT

    Everyone is welcome. Come if you can!

  72. Anonymous says:

    NO, not a clue, was in the wrong place at the wrong time when i seen what had, to have belonged to kim

  73. Anonymous says:

    is Maude, Joanne and Sissy realllllly that ignorant to think the public believes their innocence?? on Dateline Sissy made a fool of herself declaring her innocence when her actions spoke otherwise. Dumb!

  74. Anonymous says:

    the lying little snake is supposed to be in denver but then it has been said she moved to great falls. and no its not because she is INDIAN! dont bring being indian into this. its because of sissys jealousy. and not becasue her family rules poplar. sissys family doesnt rule there either. i think its because the people who do know or have information are too cowardly, i repeat COWARDLY, to tell what they know.

  75. Anonymous says:

    In regards to #51 Please find out who has this key piece of evidence and then contact authorities. This is VERY important. you could be the one to free Barry after 25 years. You could be the one to put the real murderers behind bars and FINALLY bring justice to the Nees family – don’t they deserve to have the REAL folks behind bars. Dont give up on us now!

  76. Anonymous says:

    I believe he was across the river at his grandparents helping with their branding at the ranch.

  77. Anonymous says:

    Where was Barry the day after the murder took place?

  78. Anonymous says:

    in regards to 51…do you know who?I think you are smart for helping in any way you can.GOD BLESS YOU!!!I know you will be safe from harm with this evedence,did you report it now?.

  79. Anonymous says:

    no! i hear she gave it to someone

  80. Anonymous says:

    Dateline Mystery, I have tried and will continue to try to contact them. Please can someone tell me why the FBI has not been involved? This case I would think? is screaming for them to get involved. I am so dissapointed in MONTANA!As well as The FBI. aND YOU, Mr. Tester, what the hell is wrong with you???? Anyone who has followed the case surely knows that Barry did not do this and the STOLEN evidence, and refusal to process the hand print! Why because it is MAUDE’S. And where the hell is the lying little snake? Denver? Coward! She is a Murderer and no one cares? Beacuse she is an INDIAN? Her family rules Poplar? Her family has the Poplar residents that scared? I am sorry to those I am offending! But this is simply sickening! How can anyone sit back and let this kind of thing happen? let alone continue? This is a case of pure ingorance, POLITICAL IGNORANCE! SELFISHNESS! Am I wrong in thinking that the FBI could bring this all to an end? Where are they? The last entry about the necklace, ‘WOW’. What can one say?

  81. Anonymous says:

    Have you gone to the authorities about this? I’m curious if you did and if they ignored you or if you wrote a statement?

    This is evidence! This is not some trophy to brag about!

    I’m just curious if you reported this and to who and how was it handled?

    If you haven’t, then I suggest that you go to the FBI. Don’t have faith in the law enforcement in Poplar.

  82. Anonymous says:

    I BET it isnt there anymore, HAVE YOU REPORTED THIS BEFOR NOW!!!!!!!!!???????????

  83. Anonymous says:

    kims necklace (it was her class key necklace)was in sissy atkinsons jewerly box in 1995!

  84. Anonymous says:

    IDEA: Dateline set the stage for the American public to HEAR and SEE some of the case. But there are to many questions that the folks around the country wanting answers for . I think they should get 20/20 to do a follow up now. More coverage! More intense interviews. I’d like to see them interview the following:

    Ask Steve Greyhawk just what he was up to and the same with Sissy’s brother

    Ask Governor Schweitzer why he hasn’t stepped in and taken care of this matter and what he intends to do?

    Ask Marc Racicot WHY he would mislead a jury the way he did?

    Maybe even interview Clinton and Obama and ask them just what they intend to do if anything if they are elected? We know that McCain won’t do anything – for the love of God he’s a Republican and so was Marc Racicot and Marc was very close with Bush and so we know why Bush hasn’t’ stepped in.

    Interview the FBI who apparently were involved?

    We need more coverage on this case – more national coverage.

    It’s an election year and would be a GREAT time to put some of the politicians in the “hot seat” and ask questions!

    Nobody does it better than Barbara Walters or Diane Sawyer!

    If they can keep the media going – and get more people to watch something like 20/20, it would spark more interest.

    I think we should all write to 20/20 and ask for a follow up to the Dateline investigation!!!!

  85. Melanie says:

    I found this tidbit of information interesting:

    Montana exoneree settles civil suit, calls for review of faulty forensics

    Posted: January 14, 2008 11:10 am

    Jimmy Ray Bromgard, who was exonerated in 2002 after spending more than 12 years in Montana prison for a rape he didn’t commit, settled a civil lawsuit with the state of Montana on Friday for $3.5 million, according to press reports. He sued the state and several officials in 2004, alleging that negligence by officers and officials led to his 1987 wrongful conviction.

    Bromgard was convicted partly based on the false testimony of forensic analyst Arnold Melnikoff, who said hairs from the crime matched Bromgard and cited fabricated statistics on the stand. In a statement Friday, Bromgard said the state should review all cases in which hair evidence led to conviction, in case more innocent people remain behind bars.

    “I urge the attorney general to appoint an independent examiner to conduct DNA testing on the hairs in every criminal case in which Melnikoff declared a match,” Bromgard said in a statement released by his attorneys. “DNA and the truth set me free. The state of Montana should not be allowed to ignore its duty to seek the truth in all of these other criminal cases.”

    Read the full story here. (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 01/12/08

    The plot just cant get any thicker.

    Please also consider givng to Centurion Ministries. I have already posted this elsewhere but it bears repeating.


  86. Anonymous says:

    For those of you who would like to help from a distance, don’t forget to donate to this group. I have. They are doing all they can to free Barry Beach and need financial assistance to continue their work.

  87. Anonymous says:

    It’s the big election year – I think we need to put the pressure on the presidential candidates and on those MT candidates too- if everyone wrote and told them you weren’t going to vote for them – maybe they’d get nervous about losing thier election and would be willing to do something about it. Anyone gets a chance to ask them a question – just ask “and just what are YOU going to do about Barry Beach in Montana?” – keep the national exposure going! And as far as Montana – DO NOT vote for McGrath (I think that’s his name) he is against Barry!

  88. Anonymous says:

    BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott,BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, Don’t buy made in Montana, DON’T BUY MADE IN MONTANA, BOYCOTT, boycott, BOYCOTT, boycott,

  89. Anonymous says:

    I agree. We need to BOYCOTT Montana and Montana products throughout the United States until Barry Beach is given a fair trial. If he is found guilty again, the issue is dead and everyone goes away. Not guilty, justice is served and everyone goes away. Smart move Montana. Why don’t you try this instead of the redneck/hillbilly tactics you have utilized thus far?

  90. Anonymous says:


  91. raven says:

    What evidence DOES remain?

  92. Anonymous says:




  93. Anonymous says:

    Was the hammer found in the river ever analized for prints or damage? Where is it now? What abouth the piece of iron (metal bar) from the river, analized? Comments have been made that she may have been beat with a tire iron, hammer ,or a cresent wrench. Someone said it couldn’t have been the metal pipe; it appears to me the metal pipe was much like a tire iron. I believe the interviews with the Nees family would leave doubt that a cresent wrench was in the truck. The autopsy drawings appear to show a hammer as a weapon. With the amount of damage done to the skull area it would appear that it would be impossible to know if she was kicked.

  94. Anonymous says:

    What was the piece of Metal from the floor of the truck mentioned in the FBI Reports? Was this jewelry or part of the weapon or what?

  95. Anonymous says:

    Kim’s necklace: Was anyone questioned about the necklace she was wearing? Did Kim have a necklace she wore all the time? The autopsy report shows part of a gold chain. It would seem to me that whoever threw her in the river may have the rest of the necklace. How did part of the gold chain stay on her neck unless it was forceabley removed. Has the crime scene ever been covered by a metal detector?

  96. Anonymous says:

    The hair on the sweater: Could it have belonged to Greg Norgaard? Him and Kim were dating, she had been in his car/pickup (there seems to be a question about the vechicle) that night. Could the hair have got on the sweater before he took her home?

  97. Anonymous says:

    I grew up in Poplar but left after high school. I know most of the people involved in Kims murder and cover up. Poplar is the wild west and a place where might makes right. Until these types of people are brought to justice they will continue to make Poplar a place that is not fit to live in or raise families. These type of people laugh at the law and do anything they can get away with. Only the residents can rise up and turn this community around. As long as you remain scared you are just waiting to be the next victim.

  98. Anonymous says:

    I agree it is time to talk to family and neighbors and relatives show them the dateline show and have them take a honest unbiased look the evidence on this website. Everyone who never even knew about this case or where Poplar MT is watched it and said this is terrible thing here he is innocence. And those other people questioned through the way they answered question EX gov Ratciot, Malhum the two KKK detectives from Lousiana their body language tells the truth about their answers.

  99. Anonymous says:

    We can make a difference. We get enough people interested in this and go to the web page about how you can help. There are addresses, email addresses and phone numbers of who to contact. And these people who put up this website. Help them out too. This is a nice website and I bet it cost a lot of money to create and maintain. And get those with informaation to come forward. They can be protected from the violence. I, for one, am not going to go away until Barry Beach is given a new trial and let a jury decide if he is guilty. If he is found guily again, everyone goes away. If he is found innocent, the state can save face and say “we still think he is guilty, but a jury of his peers found him innocent.” So, what does the state have to lose?

  100. Anonymous says:

    Who do you think runs the State Bar? Don’t be stupid, they are all in the same barrel. Many black and white cases against attorneys have been taken before the State Bar, just to be rejected. Haven’t you ever heard that Montana is ruled by it’s own law. Maybe we should rename that state “Mexico”.

  101. Anonymous says:

    I would like to know why a State Bar hearing has not been requested against the prosecutor? He committed perjury in an open court. That is now conclusive that he committed not only the criminal offense of perjury, but a Canon Ethics violation as well. Not to mention misuse of authority, false imprisonment.

    Someone needs to start putting the screws to the politicans and cops who fabricated this crap. This is just ludicrous. Punishing an innocent man to protect political positions is beyond egomaniacal behavior. It’s as amoral as it gets. No wonder so many people have lost their trust in law enforcement.

  102. Anonymous says:


  103. Anonymous says:

    Well, with the 42 sets of fingerprints, 5 sets of footprints, all the beer cans in and outside of the truck and the numerous cigarette butts, it is not only apparent, but obvious that there were numerous people at the crime scene. A big old party that turned very ugly when some very violent kids took a life in jealousy, rage, anger and hatred.

  104. Anonymous says:

    Lets debate some of the evidence–
    Where are the keys to the pickup? The river has been searched. Did someone keep the keys as a souvenir? Do they still have them?
    Who would remove the purse and sweater from the pickup? I assume these were in the truck when the attack occured. Or, was Kim wearing the sweater and removed it prior to an altercation? I read there was a bloody handprint on the purse; this makes me believe it was moved after or during the altercation. Who moved it? Watching over ones purse and sweater is a “girl thing” and so is trusting someone with the keys to the truck. “Here hold my purse, sweater, and keys while I take care of this!”
    I appears to me, more than one person had to be present when Kim was killed.

  105. Anonymous says:

    Why was Maude’s car seen coming up from the park the night of the murder? Why was it reported by an officer on duty to the Senior officer (Maude’s father) and never logged in? Why has Maude lied saying she was at home when she was seen by the police officer? Why has she left the state of Montana? Why did she ignore the court summons to appear before the Board of Pardons and Parole? Why did she check herself into a psych ward as an excuse to avoid appearing before the BOPP? Why was Dana Kirn killed when he threatened to expose her as being involved in the death of Kim Nees? Why did Maude’s father break into the evidence room where the murder scene evidence was being kept? He actually broke the lock on the door saying he had to use the bathroom located there when there was another bathroom? Maude’s car was in an accident with a parked car that night as well but that wasn’t reported either since her father was on duty that night because that would have shown her out after the time when she said she was home? Maude and her father need to be confronted with all these lies.

  106. Anonymous says:

    Please forward any information you may have regarding the night of the murder to the tip line found on the home page of this site so that it can be investigated by the private investigators. Thank you.

  107. Anonymous says:

    That’s the first step:admitting she made those statements!

  108. Anonymous says:

    Maude would confess to murder to make people afraid of her? Yeah, that’s the person I want as my neighbor. Let us assume that you are correct. Just for a moment. Why won’t Maude come back from Denver and her obvious hiding? Why won’t she share her story? Why does she refuse to be interviewed? Why won’t she submit to testing to see if she matches any of the evidence at the crime scene? A person that is not guilty would do so. She is acting like a guilty person. Group that with her confessions to numerous people, and I think we have one of our murderers.

  109. Anonymous says:

    I can see Maude making those statements just to make people afraid of her but I but I dont believe she had anything to do with kims death.

  110. Anonymous says:


    April 1, 2008
    Life’s A Beach: Barry Beach Case Involves Interesting Statement Against Interest Issue

    The case of Barry Beach has been a long strange trip which could probably be fodder for several months worth of posts on this site. Today, I will only focus on one. In 1984, Beach was convicted of the 1979 murder of seventeen year-old high school valedictorian Kim Nees on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation in Montana. Here is a brief recounting of the details of the case. Around 7:00 A.M. on June 16, 1979, two tribal police officers went to investigate a truck parked on a bluff overlooking the Poplar River Bridge. They saw blood inside the locked vehicle and a clump of bloody hair on the ground. Following a drag trail, they discovered Nees partly submerged, face up in the river.

    The murder went unsolved for several years, until the then twenty year-old Beach, who was living with his father in Louisiana, was arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor in January 1983. After being held in jail for three days, two officers questioned Beach for hours, trying to link him to the abductions and deaths of three young local women. Eventually, Beach confessed to these Louisiana deaths and the murder of Nees four years earlier. According to the reported confession, which can be found here, Kimberly Nees was the sister of Beach’s girlfriend. One day in the victim’s truck, Beach made sexual advances on Kim and got angry and strangled her when she resisted his advances. Nees then escaped out the driver’s door and Beach came around the truck and hit her with a crescent wrench. He then dragged her body and pushed it over an embankment. Finally, he returned to the truck several times to cover his tracks, throwing evidence into a river

    Beach’s confession to the Louisiana murders didn’t stick and other suspects were eventually arrested for them (Beach apparently wasn’t even in Louisiana at the time of the murders). About one year later, however, Beach was convicted of Nees’ murder and sentenced to 100 years imprisonment without the possibility of parole in large part based upon his confession. Beach subsequently lodged several appeals, but none were successful. Beach’s cause was then taken up by others. One such group is Montanans For Justice, a group of Montanans concerned about the Beach case, which has a website detailing the problems it has with the evidence in the case. According to the group, inter alia, Beach’s confession was coerced and inconsistent with the crime scene evidence, the evidence was mishandled, and a bloody palm print found on the victim’s truck doesn’t match Beach or Nees. Apparently, the New Jersey based innocence group Centurion Ministries also took up Beach’s cause, filing a petition seeking a new trial for Beach, which can be found here. The petition was based in large part on alleged statements made by a group of young girls and others which implicate the girls in the murder and exonerate Beach. The State, however, opposed the motion, and a district judge in Wolf Point denied the request yesterday. Beach’s attorney has vowed to appeal the Supreme Court of Montana and then possibly go to federal court.

    At first blush, I’m not quite sure what to think of the case although it seems like there is a strong possibility that Beach is wrongfully in jail, much like in the Tim Masters case. I think that I will have a better sense of things after a Dateline special on the case airs on Friday. As I noted, though, I only want to focus on one issue in the case, and that is the issue of how courts should determine the admissibility of statements against interest that incriminate the speaker and exonerate the defendant. As noted, the petition for a new trial was based, inter alia, in large part on alleged statements made by a group of young girls, including Maude Grayhawk, which implicate the girls in the murder and exonerate Beach. According to the petition, Grayhawk made repeated these statements to several people on various occasions.

    The question is whether these statements are admissible under Montana Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3), which indicates that when the declarant is “unavailable” to testify at trial, “[a] statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid a claim by the declarant against another or to make the declarant an object of hatred, ridicule, or disgrace, that a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would not have made the statement unless the declarant believed it to be true” is admissible as an exception to the rule against hearsay. However, “[a] statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.” Now, there are many questions in the Beach case that need to be resolve before even reaching Rule 804(b)(3), such as whether Maude is unavailable and whether Beach’s appeal was timely.

    Assuming, however, that these requirements are met, we are still left with the questions of why we have the “corroborating circumstances” requirement in this one circumstance and how it is satisfied. According to the Advisory Committee Note to Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3), this requirement is in place because there is “distrust of evidence of confessions by third persons offered to exculpate the accused arising from suspicions of fabrication either of the fact of the making of the confession or in its contents.” In other words, we don’t want a defendant to be able to achieve acquittal by getting a friend to admit to the crime, which is why corroborating circumstances are necessary.

    When, however, do such corroborating circumstances exist? According to the petition for Beach, they existed because Maude repeated her statements to several people, but according to the State, this was an irrelevant or insufficient factor. Personally, I think it is a very relevant factor and agree with the five part test laid out by the Fourth Circuit in United States v. Lowe, 65 F.3d 1137, 1146 (4th Cir. 1995), which considers:

    -(1) whether the declarant had at the time of making the statement pled guilty or was still exposed to prosecution for making the statement (here, Maude was still exposed to prosecution);

    -(2) the declarant’s motive in making the statement and whether there was a reason for the declarant to lie (as far as I can tell, there was no reason for Maude to lie);

    -(3) whether the declarant repeated the statement and did so consistently (obviously, this is the lynchpin to the petition’s argument);

    -(4) the party or parties to whom the statement was made (the statements were made to family members and friends);

    -(5) the relationship of the declarant with the accused (apparently, they weren’t friends); and

    -(6) the nature and strength of independent evidence relevant to the conduct in question (according to Montanans for Justice, the evidence against Beach is weak).

    Again, this discussion is based upon a very rudimentary understanding of the case, and other issues may preclude this stage of the analysis from even being reached. Assuming, however, that this stage of the analysis is reached in Beach’s subsequent appeals, I think he has a strong argument that all six factors are in his favor, allowing for the admission of Maude’s statements.

  111. Anonymous says:

    Isn’t destroying evidence against the law in Montana?. Regardless of whether the person was law enforcement or not or a relative. Shouldn’t that person be prosecuted?

  112. Anonymous says:

    Go Here, WOW

    Wow, look what I was just sent.

    It appears a Chicago Law Prof disagrees with the Judges ruling yesterday.



    Dwiddle Dweebe

    check this guy out

  113. Montanans for Justice says:

    The Datelaine NBC 2-hour special will air this Friday, April 4, 2008 at 8pm MDT. Please don’t miss this national coverage of terrible injustice in our own state.

  114. Anonymous says:

    So, who would investigate these people? Native vs. white? Would it be the FBI if they are white? And the tribal police & BIA if they are Native? In the end, does that mean that if they are Native American, they walk scott free on murder because obviously they are not going to be investigated by their own relatives. Can the FBI just step in and take over the whole thing…no matter what their ethnic background?

  115. Anonymous says:

    It is interesting that the defence was never provied any of the information on the prior suspect by the prosecutor in this case (Nifonged) With all of the other evidence give by persons to the investigators I find it interesting that only a very few people were ever printed to see if there prints matched those recovered at the crime scene. It almost looks like the only people that were printed were persons that they had a good idea were never involved. I also wonder why none of the person (Females) mentioned as being involved in this crime were never realy investigated. Interesting is the fact that a deputy related to one of the people that may be involved in this case broke into the evidence room, “TO PEE”. What does the sheriff’s department use for an evidence room – The bathroom. This whole case stinks and smacks of cover up

  116. Anonymous says:

    Wow! Check out the preview for the Dateline show. They have a link under “Latest News” and on the NBC icon on each page.

  117. Anonymous says:

    This appeared on another blog concerning this subject. Hmmmmm interesting.

    From: MSN Nicknamegiveacare1 Sent: 3/25/2008 7:13 PM
    There seems to be more to the story then any one is really letting on…the name I keep seeing is Maude (GrayHawk) Kirn, she as I know is very poisonious and has venom when she strikes. Word is…not only is she responsible for one murder but also for 3. The other two are Dana Kirn (very liked man, hard worker, family man) her husband and Joseph Cloud Boy (who she purposely took down to the New bridge the night he got killed knowing that MB was there). Seems she likes to hit with objects ask Mary and Judy Reddog rumor has it that she took a bat outside of brockton bar and broke it on Mary’s head. People read the autopsy report the bruising on Kims arms are a set of 2 different hands that drug her, the foot print was small for a guys. The only wrong Rose Atkinson did was be friends with a poisonious snake.

  118. Anonymous says:

    Are you just being sarcastic? or passing the buck on the blame one more time?

  119. Anonymous says:

    Hey, I just read all of this…again,…. from what I can see, it appears to me that several of my classmates and Kim’s were out that nite.. so, the people sittin in the cab of her pickup,,,I belive that there was 5….Kim Nees, Laurie Scafer, Ed Vandover, Caleb Gorneau and Shannon O Brien… Shannon was most likely sitting on Caleb’s lap, so one or more of the fingerprints from the dash should be hers… we all know Laurie Shafer is just “helping Centurian” so she is out of the limelight and they will not look at her.. she was with Ed all night so???? We know Ed was there… obviously so was Laurie… check the prints on those two and see if they don’t match…..

  120. Anonymous says:

    Well, the supposed pubic hair supposedly found on Kim Nees sweater is missing. Marc Racicot told the jury in his opening statement that the hair was definitely Barry Beach’s. Alnold Melnikoff, state forensic scientist at the time (later discredited in his profession), said that it was characteristic of Barry Beach. Nothing more. The Fort Peck police made sure the evidence in the case was compromised when the evidence room was broken into because someone had to pee. So, it was inadmissible in cout. Now, the hair is missing in action and can’t be tested using DNA.

    - The Beach Bum

  121. Anonymous says:

    Has the State of Montana actually “lost” evidence in this case? I think I read that on this website somewhere, but it seems hard to believe.

  122. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like there would be more evidence available if “officer” Stevie Greyhawk hadn’t broken into the evidence room. He did explain though why he did it: HE HAD TO PEEEE. “Sheriff” Mahlum meted out tough discipline though. He put a note in his permanent record. Good ole boys up there knew how to take care of buisness (third world style). Someone decides who is not going to take the rap (Maude Greyhawk). Others when offered up a suspect can massage the story to fit. Boys like Racicot I’m sure believed Barry was guilty, after all he confessed to a backwoods Louisianan interrogation. He figures he must be guilty, Ill be damned if I let the evidece get in the way. There is a lot of shame to go around here. They can only cover up there misdeeds so long!

  123. Anonymous says:


  124. Anonymous says:


  125. Anonymous says:

    I remember reading in some documents that this Arnold Melnikoff wrote to Marc Racicot telling him that there was a match between Barry Beach and the hair in question several days before Marc Racicot wrote to tell Arnold Melnikoff that he had not yet been able to get a sample of Barry Beach’s hair, but that he would try and get it soon. Anyone else remember reading this?

  126. Anonymous says:

    I understand that the hair was sought by Centurion Ministries for DNA testing but the hair has disappeared. Normally when evidence is disposed of, there is a record of its disposal but there is no record of that. It just can’t be found. The other really curious thing about the hair is that the original FBI analysis of the sweater showed NO such foreign hair on the sweater (other than Kim’s own and some animal hair). There’s a lot of really strange things about the hair. Not the least of which was Marc Racicot telling the jury about the hair even though it was inadmissible AND claiming that it was a certain match to Barry Beach even though that was not what the crime lab analysis said.

  127. Anonymous says:

    From what I have read, there is a hair that was found on the sweater. Is that correct? Who’s hair is it? Where is it? I remember reading that the prosecution claimed it was Barry Beach’s at the trial. Why is that if it isn’t his? Is it a male or female hair? White or Native?

  128. Anonymous says:

    Arnold Melnikoff was fired by Montana and Washington over his shoddy work which has been proved wrong so many times. Since this guy was convicted on the basis of Arnold Melnikoff’s work, shouldn’t the state be reviewing the validity of this conviction?

  129. Anonymous says:

    The white sweater (found neatly folded by the truck)seems out of place in the crime scene. Has it been positively identified as belonging to Kim?

Leave a Reply