Montanans for Justice

1 - 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?
 (Comment this)

2 - 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? (Comment this)

3 - 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? (Comment this)

4 - 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. (Comment this)

5 - 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? (Comment this)

6 - NO!!!!! THE DAY KIM WAS BRUTALLY MURDERED AND ALL THE EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED, THERE WERE NO HUMAN HAIRS OTHER THAN KIMS, HER CAT AND DOGS...THE ONLY "PUBIC HAIR" CAME AFTER BARRY WAS BACK IN JAIL IN WOLF POINT AND MAHLUM AND WILSON TOOK HIM TO THE HOSPITAL TO HAVE THEM TAKE HIS HAIRS, THEN
MYSTERIOUSLY THEY (COPS) SAY THIS WAS ON KIMS SWEATER..THE FBI REPORTS SAY THE OPPOSITE..THERE WERE ONLY KIM AND HER PETS HAIRS ON THE SWEATER...
 (Comment this)

7 - CORRECT AMUNDO!! MELNIKOFF SAID THERE WAS A MATCH BEFORE THEY HAD EVEN TAKEN BARRY TO GIVE HIS HAIR SAMPLES...HOW CAN THIS BE...MMMM MAYBE THE WONDERFUL MR. WELLENSTEIN AND MS PLUBELL COULD TELL US,,,OH, NO THEN THEY WOULD GIVE UP THEIR CONNECTION TO MARC RACIOT... BIRDS OF A FEATHER...YOU GET THE REST (Comment this)

8 - 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! (Comment this)

9 - 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. (Comment this)

10 - 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 (Comment this)

11 - 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..... (Comment this)

12 - Are you just being sarcastic? or passing the buck on the blame one more time? (Comment this)

13 - 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. (Comment this)

14 - Wow! Check out the preview for the Dateline show. They have a link under "Latest News" and on the NBC icon on each page. (Comment this)

15 - 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 (Comment this)

16 - 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? (Comment this)

17 - 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. (Comment this)

18 - Go Here, WOW

Wow, look what I was just sent.

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

Interesting.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2008/04/lifes-a-beach-b.html

Dwiddle Dweebe


Wow
check this guy out
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2008/04/lifes-a-beach-b.html
 (Comment this)

19 - 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? (Comment this)

20 - http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/Tuesday,

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.

 (Comment this)

21 - 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. (Comment this)

22 - 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. (Comment this)

23 - That's the first step:admitting she made those statements! (Comment this)

24 - 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. (Comment this)

25 - 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. (Comment this)

26 - 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. (Comment this)

27 - 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. (Comment this)

28 - WE MUST DEMAND JUSTICE... THE LIKES OF MARK RASCIOT, DEAN MAHLUM, RON GRANGER, TAMMY PLUBELL, MIKE WELLENSTEIN, MIKE MCGRATH AND ALL WHO ARE BACKING THEM,,, SORRY BRIAN SCHWEITZER, I REALLY THOUGHT YOU WERE MORE OF A MAN THAN A PUPPET.. NO YOU WILL NOT GET MY VOTE, MY FAMILIES VOTE, OR ANY OF MY FRIENDS VOTES WHICH I MAY ADD IS A HUGE PERCENT OF THE INDIAN VOTE HERE IN MONTANA... I AM SO ASHAMED OF ALL OF YOU...TAMMY PLUM-DUMB-BELL YOU NEED TO GROW UP.. YOU SICKEN ME. ALL OF YOU SICKEN ME, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT IN THE OFFICES ANY ONE OF YOU HOLD.... YOU WILL NOT FOR LONG, WE WILL HAVE FRESH, JUSTICE SEEKING, TRUTH OBTAINING, PEOPLE IN OUR UPCOMING ELECTION THAT WILL WIPE YOUR FACES INTO THE GROUND WHERE YOU ALL BELONG. (Comment this)

29 - 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. (Comment this)

30 - 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". (Comment this)

31 - 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? (Comment this)

32 - 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. (Comment this)

33 - 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. (Comment this)

34 - 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? (Comment this)

35 - 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? (Comment this)

36 - 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? (Comment this)

37 - 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. (Comment this)

38 - WHERE IS THIS EVIDENCE, THE STATE HOLDS ALL EVIDENCE AND THEY HAVE LOST NEARLY ALL OF IT. I WONDER WHY? BARRY ASKS, HOW CAN I PROVE I, AM, WHEN THE STATE, THE KEEPER OF THE EVIDENCE, LOOSES ALL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT COULD SET ME FREE.

THE STATES SMART, THEY KNOW THAT THEY COULDN'T WIN IF THEY PRESERVED THE EVIDENCE, THEY CONVENIENTLY LOST ALL OF IT. I COULD MAKE A LIST OF THE EVIDENCE THE STATE HAS LOST, BUT YOU HAVE ALL HEARD ALREADY, ON THIS BLOG.

DWIDDLE DWEEBE (Comment this)

39 - What evidence DOES remain? (Comment this)

40 - BOYCOTT MONTANA AND MONTANA PRODUCTS UNTIL BARRY BEACH GOES FREE!!! (Comment this)

41 - 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? (Comment this)

42 - 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, (Comment this)

43 - 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! (Comment this)

44 - 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. (Comment this)

45 - 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.

http://www.centurionministries.org/donations.html (Comment this)

46 - 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!!!!
 (Comment this)

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

48 - I BET it isnt there anymore, HAVE YOU REPORTED THIS BEFOR NOW!!!!!!!!!??????????? (Comment this)

49 - 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. (Comment this)

50 - 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? (Comment this)