Michael George found guilty

twitter Michael George found guilty0facebook Michael George found guilty0google Michael George found guilty0pinterest Michael George found guilty0tumblr Michael George found guiltyreddit Michael George found guilty0stumbleupon Michael George found guilty0

A jury has found Michael George guilty in the slaying of his wife 17 years ago.

George was accused of shooting his wife, Barbara, in the head on July 13, 1990, and making the crime look like a robbery. The jury found George guilty of first-degree murder, felony firearm, insurance fraud and obtaining money from an insurance agency under false pretenses.

The four-man and eight-woman jury began deliberations Friday afternoon after listening to the testimony of nearly 50 witnesses in the trial that drew national media attention.

Comments

  1. Glenn Barbis Jr. says:

    Wow! I’m speechless. I know most of the evidence was circumstantial, and there was nothing physically linking him to the crime…so….Wow!

    I guess this leaves the future of the Pittsburgh Comicon up in the air. This year’s convention was already paid for in full, and I have been told it will go on…but who knows what happens after April. Pitt-Con was always my favorite convention to go to, a family-friendly gathering of friends, and I for one, would miss it if it ends.

    Wow.

  2. Hmmmm … I wonder how this will affect the Pittsburgh ComicCon.

  3. Well, I’m still going. Its not the show’s fault and its a damn good show. Lets all just go there and have a great time. I’m not letting it effect my time at the show. I’ll see you all there.

  4. michael says:

    Wow, that’s big! He’s gonna get a harsh sentence for all those crimes.

  5. Man, this is a shame. The Michael I know is a really great guy… maybe they can appeal this.. I mean, no weapon? All circumstantial evidence? The cops didn’t even test his hands for residue back then– it seems like a circus to me.

    I know I’ll do whatever I can to keep Pittsburgh Comicon going– I assume their comic shop will go on, and if his wife needs any help, the creative community around Pittsburgh would help them keep Pittcon going strong for their family.

  6. All of the believers of Michael George…Check out Dateline in a few months to see the truth.
    Guilty of 1st degree murder today as well as insurance fraud.
    The legal process does work.
    The family of Barbara George has had to deal with this for all of these years, and this has made everyone have to go through the emotions once again. All while Mike walked free and deceived other people.
    I feel horrible for the daughters of Barbie, but Mike is the one who has caused this grief. It is now for him to own up to the truth.

  7. Ed Brubaker says:

    I have no idea whether this guy did it or not, but I cannot believe that jury convicted him. I read all the articles and it sounded like there was a boatload of reasonable doubt, at least. I’d love to hear why the jury convicted him.

  8. Steve Taylor says:

    Although, it is fairly odd that he had a telephone conversation with a customer at the comic shop during the period where he claims to have been at his mother’s home,…right at the same time when his mother and children had left him alone to go to the park.

  9. I’m with DJ COFFMAN on this one. Last year was my first time as a guest at the show and I was treated extremely well! I loved the show and its obvious the folks who run it do as well. I do hope that the comics’ community will step up and keep the spirit of this show alive and strong. Chins up people. Lets rock it this April.

  10. I dig the Pitt Con too, but I can’t help but think that a comic book convention is the *least* of Mr. George’s concerns right now…

  11. “his mother and two daughters have testified he was asleep on the couch when the murder took place.”

    His own daughters testified this. Man they must be devastated. I cant believe OJ gets off with his blood everywhere on the crime scene but this guy gets convicted. How is that even fair?

  12. With the lack of new evidence — or really anything but circumstantial evidence to begin with — I am utterly flabbergasted. I’ll be shocked if this stands on appeal.

  13. I don’t have any opinion on this either way, but I need to mention that it always annoys me to read people discussing circumstantial evidence without understanding it. Circumstantial evidence is the collection of *physical facts* of a case, as opposed to direct evidence, or “eyewitness testimony” which can be flawed, misremembered, or biased.

    I think the general misunderstanding of the “circumstantial” term comes from decades of badly-written TV drama, where the crusading defense lawyer decries the use of flimsy circumstantial evidence. It reality, it’s more reliable than eyewitness testimony, and usually comprises the bulk of a good case.

  14. Thanks for posting something that actually clarifies what circumstantial evidence is, Patrick.

  15. justice finally served. I grew up with both families and as a 10 year old….I knew he was guilty.

    Finally some closure for Barb’s family

  16. Ed Brubaker says:

    “Circumstantial evidence is the collection of *physical facts* of a case, as opposed to direct evidence, or “eyewitness testimony” which can be flawed, misremembered, or biased.”

    So, what exactly was this evidence at the trial? I read every article and didn’t see anything BUT witness statements. Some people saying he was sleazy, some saying he didn’t mourn properly or wasn’t devastated, others saying the exact opposite. The biggest factor seems to have been a guy who claimed to have called the store a half hour before the murder and talked to him on the phone, but there’s no phone records, just someone’s memory.

    I didn’t see any evidence at all in this trial, not in any of the articles about it. That’s why I was amazed he was convicted. It seems like the judge should have given stronger instructions to the jury about the definitions of reasonable doubt.

    I wonder if it’ll get an appeal.

    And still, I have no idea whether he’s guilty. It just seems like he got convicted of murder because he cheated on his wife and then didn’t testify, which the jury is not supposed to take into consideration, by law.

  17. A-rod says:

    If history has proven anything it’s that blog postings on the internet are much more accurate at proving innocence or guilt than actual evidence presented at a trial.
    I mean what was that Judge thinking? Allowing “Lawyers” to present “evidence” to a “Jury”?
    I’m sure all of us who were not present at this trial know waaayyyy more about what really happened than that jury does.

  18. snoid says:

    But A-rod you don’t understand this may somehow effect their geek con, and really that’s what’s important here.

  19. Ed Brubaker says:

    “If history has proven anything it’s that blog postings on the internet are much more accurate at proving innocence or guilt than actual evidence presented at a trial.
    I mean what was that Judge thinking? Allowing “Lawyers” to present “evidence” to a “Jury”?
    I’m sure all of us who were not present at this trial know waaayyyy more about what really happened than that jury does.”

    Actually, I think I said that I read all the articles about the trial, which detailed any evidence and testimony quite clearly. So, what’s your point, other than the usual internet whiner bullshit?

  20. A-rod says:

    I would like to distance myself from snoid’s comment. My point is merely that without the benefit of being present for the entire trial any speculation on guilt or innocence is just that. If the evidence is really as absurd as many people are saying then the appeals process will do its job. Media coverage is not the best way to gather evidence.

  21. Steve Taylor says:

    Are transcripts for such things posted on line?
    Anybody know?

  22. You know what baffles me? They can convict him on circumstantial evidence, but why didn’t the police or investigators ever test his hands or arms for gunpowder residue. That was pretty common even 18 years ago, especially if they were immediately looking at the husband as a suspect. I mean, like someone else said– if OJ got off with all that blood and ACTUAL evidence, this just doesn’t seem right that there was no evidence linking him to the crime at all. Even witness statements putting him someplace else at the time? If anyone should be blamed for the long time in serving any justice, it sounds like it should be the bumbling police up there– who was running that show? Barney Fife?

  23. michael says:

    I don’t want to open up a new can of worms here, but everything I’ve read on this case (not a lot) seems to indicate his guilt.

    I mean, in my experience, most people who make a bunch of insurance money off of someone’s death (with all the questions and whatnot) are usually found to be guilty.

    I think the Pitt-Con can go on with or without him. And, not forgetting the real victim here, I feel sorry for the murdered woman.

  24. His daughters were age 4 and 2 at the time. They can testify to what they remember but at age 4 and 2….are there memories truly accurate?

    Also reports are that the time frame given by his mother for Mike being on the couch has varied over the years. Also his mother took the kids to the park after he was said to have laid down on the couch for a nap and that she and the kids have no recollection of how long specificially they were gone.

    So they were not at home the entire time he was said to be napping on the couch and there is a phone call that places him at the store at the time in question.

    He and his then mistress now wife refused to take the stand. As somone who did jury duty for other trials, i can say that I like to hear from all sides in a case and that to me at least, hiding behind the 5th amendment is a very bad sign of guilt.

    Also his behavior before and especially after the murder is highly suspicious.

    Per the testimony of the detectives, George also let slip a comment as he was being taken to the hospital that “something msut have fell on her in the backroom”……yet they hadn’t told him she was found in the backroom…..

    Also there were NO SIGNS of forced entry into or out of the store, his wife still had her wallet and jewelry on, and the cash register was not damaged/broken into and all display cases of the high valued merchandise were undamaged…. kinda puts the lie to the robbery claim doesn’t it?

    Who am i? I am one of the 100 or so that were interviewed by the detectives. I was not called to testify nor am I bound by any type of gag order to not discuss this case at all.

    Rot in Prison Mike George.

  25. 1. had an affair with a coworker back in his insurance sales days
    2. Had an affair with a comic shop employee (Renee) who is now his wife. Within about 2 months after the murder they were living together.
    3. no emotion shown at funeral, used shades to conceal his eyes, no history of optical problems/disease.
    4. hugged a woman who would take her son to his store and flirted with her at the funeral a few feet from the casket!!!! flirted with same woman again when she and son came to store after all this
    5. had a higher valued insurance policy on his wife at the time then he did on himself. (typically the breadwinner, in this case himself, carries the higher policy)
    6. plenty of evidence of unhappy marriage
    7. refused to support attempts at posting a reward for information that would lead to arrest/conviction
    8. not very cooperative with the cops back then about the investigation
    9. relocated from store where murder committed to set up another location as his main store
    10. two years after the murder, his mistress has legally split from HER husband and marries Mike and they split for Pennsylvania to reopen the business down there and start the comiccon
    11. Neither Mike nor former mistress now current wife Renee take the stand….5th amendment makes a nice refuge doesn’t it?
    12. wallet and jewelry still on body of the deceased, plus NO SIGNS AT ALL of forced entry or rushed exit from the store, plus the cash register and all display cases were undamaged, thus putting major doubt to the robbery story
    13. defense claims that someone was “out to get Mike George and got his wife instead”…yet this man goes to another state and sets up a rather public business and founds a major comic convention…seems like for a man with a bullseye on him that to open such a public business is just asking for someone “out to get you” to come and get you doesn’t it?
    14. phone call ties him to the store in the time frame of the murder
    15. there were never any other suspects and the police have always suspected Mike George.

    Mike’s mother states he came over with the kids and proceeded to take a nap on the couch. Yet she then leaves with the kids who are aged 4 and 2 at the time, to go to the park….thus NO ONE THERE can say with 100% certainty that Mike was indeed home napping on the couch the time his wife was murdered. Plus his mother’s recollection of the time he arrived and went to nap has changed a bit over the years, and the kids were too young to recall the time of arrival at the house as well as how long they were gone.

    Witnesses did state that earlier that day that Mike and Barb were outside the store arguing rather loudly.

    Barb was going to hold a “surprise” birthday party for him at the store and closed up early to go get the party food.
    We have the phone call from the regular customer that places Mike in the store within the time frame of the murder.
    testimony from detectives involved in the case state that Mike made a bad verbal slip while riding to the hospital. They told him she was injured. On the ride there Mike comments that “something must have fallen and hit her in the backroom”….cops never told him she was found in the backroom….
    Defense can try to divert suspicion all they want, but go back and look at the facts including his verbal slip on the ride to the hospital and the phone call that places him at the store in the time frame in question…..
    Guilty.

    How did he do it? The scenario constructed:
    As the store owner he has the keys to front and back doors. Barb locks up and goes out for the party supplies. Mike slips in the back door and lies in wait in the backroom after having left his mother’s house confident that he has his alibi locked down. However while he was waiting the phone call occurred and he answered the phone rather then let it ring until the caller gave up. The caller was a REGULAR CUSTOMER/MEMBER of the store and knew what Mike sounded like. Realizing that the call could be a problem Mike cuts the call short. She returns and he confronts her in the backroom and shoots her. Bear in mind that she was shot execution style in the back of the head, she wasn’t running for her life trying to flee, she was bent over, possibly kneeling when she was shot.
    In a feeble attempt to claim robbery, he claimed that valued comics were stolen from the store. Bear in mind that there are no signs of forced entry and no rushed exit, no display cases are broken into or damaged, the cash register was completely untouched, and Barb still had her jewelry and wallet on her when she was found.
    Bottom line: there are two conflicting timelines that show Mike was in two places at once: his mom’s home and the store where the murder was committed. Mike later would claim that someone was out to get him and got Barb instead, however given the public nature of his business and the comic convention he founded that claim doesn’t hold up. Barb’s insurance policy was higher valued then his. Their marriage was unhappy, and he was two-timing her with an employee of his store. The only ones with motive to end the marriage were Renee and Mike. The only ones that stood to gain were Renee and Mike.
    I have seen posts on other boards that express sympathy for his current wife. Touching sentiment that is misplaced in this case. Renee was having an affair with this married man who would go on to kill his current wife so he could cash out the insurance and link up with her instead. She is far from innocent and I wouldn’t be surprised at all if she gets brought up on conspiracy charges, or aiding and abetting a known felon, or accessory to murder.
    Save your sympathy instead for Mike George’s two daughters. They were very young when it happened and they have belief in their father and testified on his behalf. That is fine. They were ages 4 and 2 and thus their memories of that night are not going to be very time specific and of course they would believe in their father. I do not fault them for that at all even if the belief is wrongfully placed.
    Save your sympathy also for the family of Barb, the victim and for Barb herself. Barb was a nice person and I enjoyed shopping at the store when she was there instead of Mike.
    Who am I? I am 1 of the 100 people that were tracked down by the detectives to chat with about the days when I did business with this murderer. No I wasn’t on the stand and am not now nor ever expected to be bound by any gag orders, thus I shall speak about this case as I wish whenever I wish until the court requests that I do not. I was convinced Mike was guilty all those years ago and I am happy that any information I was able to provide helped lead to his conviction.
    Known list of allegedly stolen comics:
    George had made a list of comic books he knew were included in the stolen boxes. “He didn’t put down any he wasn’t positive about,” Kotula said. The missing comics included:

    Action 6, 22, 24, 25, 33, 81, 84, 85, 88, 90
    Adventure 88
    All-American 29
    Amazing Spider-Man 9, 42, 50
    Captain America 48, 49, 54
    Daredevil 6
    Green Lantern 4, 40
    X-Men 4, 5, 6, 9, 10
    Turok 2-10
    Thor 85, 86, 91, 92, 126
    Incredible Hulk 102 (three copies)
    Flash 71, 77, 108, 123
    Fantastic Four 9, 20, 48, 49, 50
    Iron Man 1 (three copies), 3-10
    Iron Man & Sub-Mariner (two copies)

    “Approximately 300 comic books were stolen, but these are the ones that can be positively identified.”

    Main Entry:
    circumstantial evidence
    Function:
    noun
    Date:
    1736
    : evidence that tends to prove a fact by proving other events or circumstances which afford a basis for a reasonable inference of the occurrence of the fact at issue
    Prime reason why it took the cops 17 years to nail this murdering sack of garbage: As soon as it became a homicide investigation and not a robbery, the one would become 17 years later to be the key witness; Michael Renaud, went straight to the police and filed a signed and verified statement that he had placed the phone call to the store in the time frame indicated and that he spoke to Mike George. Sadly the problem is that this report did NOT get properly relayed to the detectives in charge of the case. IF it had you can bet this would not have been a cold case and that Mike George would have been rotting in prison for the past 17 years instead of living in PA. Also due to errors on the part of the police, Mike was never tested for gunshot residue nor was the gun ever found. Sad testament to the police investigators, but when you look at the statement about the phone call, and that Mike’s Alibi is far from airtight since his mother can’t honestly recall the proper timeframe they were at the park and that no one was in the house the entire time Mike was stated to be asleep. Thus it can be stated that he got up, went to commit the murder then returned. He can claim he was asleep all he wants, and his mom can try to be his alibi but since no one was in the home besides Mike for the entire time he was napping, then there is no one to truly substantiate his alibi.
    Defense Testimonies:
    According the Macomb Daily’s coverage of the trial, the defense continued to raise the possibility of another suspect in Barbara George’s murder during its final day of testimony March 13.

    Barbee Hancock-Kalbfleisch testified that Barbara George was “uneasy” and “scared” while talking to an unknown caller about “expensive comic books” approximately an hour before her murder the evening of July 13, 1990. “She stated to the person that she did not want to discuss this over the phone,” Hancock-Kalbfleish said. “It was about expensive comic books. They made her uncomfortable, they made her uneasy.”

    Further testimony did provide a window of opportunity for Michael George to have secreted himself in the store. Hancock-Kalbfleisch testified that, when she arrived at the store, the door was locked while Barbara was out ordering food for the surprise birthday party planned for Michael later that evening.

    Earlier in the trial, Michael Renaud testified for the prosecution that he called the store between 5:15 and 5:45 p.m., and spoke to Michael, who “sounded like he was in a hurry.” George’s alibi has been that he was at his mother’s home, which was located more than a 30-minute drive away, at the time of the murder.

    George’s mother, Janet also took the stand in his defense March 13. She testified that George and his two daughters arrived at her home between 5 and 5:30 p.m. While he was sleeping on her couch, she took the girls to a park approximately 10 minutes away where they spent about 25 minutes. This conflicts with statements she gave police in 2007 where she stated that she and the girls could have been at the park for up to 90 minutes. She was not asked during her March 13 testimony when Michael left her home that evening.

    Another witness, Janet George’s neighbor Margaret “Peggy” Marentette, testified that she saw both Janet and her grandchildren at the park as she drove home and then saw Michael’s van at Janet’s home. She estimated that she saw these details between 5:45 and 6 p.m.

    The final witness presented by the defense was private investigator James Vohs, a former police commissioner and former police chief in Warren, Mich. Hired by the defense to review the case, Vohs said he couldn’t provide a definitive theory. “With this evidence, I cannot make a conclusion either way why she was shot,” he said.

    Neither Michael nor Renee George took the stand during the final day of testimony. Closing arguments are scheduled for March 14. The 13-member jury will be able to consider both first- and second-degree murder. George is also charged with insurance fraud and false pretenses, accused of filing a false claim about comic books stolen from the store, and collecting a $12,600 insurance payout for those comics.

    Macomb County assistant prosecutor Steve Kaplan’s motion to have the jury consider Michael George guilty of murder even if they believe someone else actually shot Barbara George, a motion based on witness testimony about a suspicious, slightly built person wearing a fake beard who was seen near the front of the store shortly before the murder, was denied by Judge James Biernat. In his ruling, Biernat said he would not allow the jury to “wildly speculate” as there was no evidence of a “conspiracy” or a “plot or plan” in the case.

    After hearing closing arguments March 14, the jury took nine hours of deliberation over two days (March 14 and 17) to find Michael George guilty of first-degree murder, felony firearm, insurance fraud, and obtaining money from an insurance agency under false pretenses. The murder verdict carries a mandatory life sentence without the possibility of parole.

    According to coverage by The Macomb Daily, The Detroit Free Press, and The Detroit News, George, now 47, broke down and sobbed uncontrollably when the verdict was read. He had to be helped to the podium to be addressed by the judge.

    George’s defense attorney Joseph Kosmala called the decision “outrageous.”

    “I’ve been doing this 35 years and have never second-guessed a jury,” he said, “but I do today. I’m shocked by this. Michael George is an innocent man.”

    Declining to speak with the jury after the verdict, Kosmala and fellow defense attorney Carl Marlinga said they will file motions to have the verdict completely overturned.

    The conviction was the 21st out of 21 cold cases that Macomb County has been working on since 2004 when Prosecutor Eric Smith was elected. Sixteen of those cold cases resulted in guilty pleas with the remainder going to trial. Smith praised assistant Macomb County Prosecutor Steven Kaplan for his tenacity in investigating and prosecuting what was a highly circumstantial case.

    Key to the prosecution’s case was the testimony of witness Michael Renaud who said he called the Georges’ store the evening of the murder at approximately 5:30 p.m. and Michael George answered the phone, which contradicted George’s alibi of being asleep at his mother’s home at the time. “He answered the phone, that was his fatal mistake,” Kaplan said.

    Additional testimony came from Barbee Hancock-Kalbfleisch, who said that when she came to the store about the same time, she found the door locked, while Barbara was out ordering food for the surprise birthday party she was planning for Michael later that evening.

    Kaplan said that George’s decision not to testify in his own defense also helped clinch the verdict. “A defendant’s decision not to testify is generally harmful to the defense, especially when he is charged with murdering his wife,” Kaplan added.

    Lt. Craig Keith, the lead investigator on the cold case, said that in speaking to jurors after the trial, he learned that while they were initially split on their verdict, they spent much of their deliberation time reviewing the case’s timeline and various bits of testimony to reach their verdict.

  26. JamesQ says:

    I think too many people have made judgement on something they know very little about. I don’t care who you are or how much you think you know. Final judgement will come and I don’t think a panel of jurors, judges or prosecutors will have anything to do with it.

  27. about the phone call:
    1. Without phone records or caller id, there is nothing that proves that phone call.

    2. Is it not possible that if the killer was not mike george that he/she could of answered and said they were mike.

    3. That is one mans testimony that he believes that mike george was on the other end of that phone call, that does not prove murder.

    4. I cannot tell you whether he did it or not, but if you people want to believe he did based on this phone call or his reputation of cheating or his business practices you are fools.

    5. Yes you can say that it is not 100 percent sure that he was at his mothers, and you should also think that it is 100 percent not sure that you can say he was on the other end of that phone or that the man who called actually did call for that matter

    6. Please someone give me something that proves this man actually did it.
    THERE IS NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL

    7. Use your minds and actually look at this case and tell me if you feel this man based on these facts 100 percent killed his wife. YOU CANNOT

  28. Smith says:

    The person that testified about the phone call he made that places Mike George at the store had gone down to the police and filed a report about it all those years ago. From what I’ve gathered the report didn’t make it to the detectives at the time or else they would have pounced on this murderer 18 years ago.

    So we have a signed, verified 18 year old statement that places Mike George there in the time frame of the murder.

    His alibi: he was sleeping on his mothers couch: but his mother then took the daughters outside to a park. her recollection of the time frames has varied over the years as her memory seems to have skipped around a bit due to time and age. The Daughters were 4 and 2 at the time, thus their memories likely won’t be very clear either.

    However his alibi is weak due to the fact that no one was in his mothers house the entire time he was said to be asleep on the couch, THUS his mother cannot say for sure if he got up and left since NO ONE ELSE WAS THERE.

    Now add in the statement about the phone call.

    Now add in the detectives stating that all they told him was that she was injured and took him to the hospital. During the ride he said something msut have fallen and hit her in the back room. He was never told where in the store she was found.

    NO FORCED ENTRY into the store by the killer. No damaged locks, no broken windows. So…..the killer had a key to get in. Who had keys to the store besides Mike and Barb?

    Cash Register undamaged and no money taken from it. Her wallet and jewelry is still on her. No broken display cases, no damage to anything in the store.

    This alleged box of “valued comics” that was “Stolen”…..the killer didn’t tear the place up searching for them, hence the killer had to know where these alleged comics were already. Who would know that besides Mike and Barb? This presumes of course that these comics actually existed in the store of course.

    She was shot execution style in the back of the head. She wasn’t shot while running for her life and it was the one and only shot she took.

    Plenty of evidence of unhappy marriage, and that he is a lying philanderer…….

    Barb’s life insurance policy was much higher then Mike’s……

    When he was arrested he changed his story from robbery to “Someone out to get him”……ok who and why? and why kill Barb? Also Renee worked the store plenty of times by herself before and after the killing and she and Mike go to a new state to start business over….a very public business that started a very public comic convention. For someone that thinks someone was out to get him, thats a rather public occupation to be in.

    The so-called “Suspicious person” outside the store before the murder……who got a good look at this person? they say it was a fake beard and mustache the person was wearing…..how did they know it was fake? What was this person doing that was so “Suspicious”? There is no way to truly prove this “Suspicious Person” was actually there, or that they were truly “suspicious” in the first place much less that this person had anything to do with this.

    Oh and JBS……if you wish to beleive this “person” is innocent, that’s fine. I do not begrudge anyone’s right to their own opinion, however there is no need for name calling or flame wars or whining.

  29. @Smith:

    Two witnesses corroborated on the bearded individual with the Greek fisherman’s cap.

    Two adult (at the time) witnesses, Mike’s mother and his mother’s neighbor, corroborate on his vehicle being at his mother’s house at the time of the murder. Mike’s mother’s car, an ORANGE FREAKIN GREMLIN (pretty conspicuous, no?), was not seen anywhere near the murder site. Mike’s mother testified that he was asleep when she left and there when she returned. Mike’s mother’s neighbor testified that he could not have driven to the murder site and back before his mother returned.

    The evidence against him? 1) A bunch of people that he’s wronged in the past attacking his character; 2) A phone call supposedly conducted near the time of the murder, though Renaud’s testimony has changed significantly over the years; 3) A woman who claims Mike George made repeated advances on her…yet she continued to frequent his shop instead of many other Detroit area comic shops available at the time; 4) People who seem to think they are an authority on what constitutes an appropriate showing of grief.

    So…not a whole lot of credible prosecution evidence. There is no physical evidence linking Michael George to Barbara George’s murder. There are no eyewitnesses putting him at the scene. There is no murder weapon. If you believe this should be enough to convict on, I would agree with JBS: you’re a fool.

  30. She was hot but pretty stupid… I should have known better.

  31. Smith says:

    @Koja and @JBS

    Gentlebeings, (please note I wont say Gentlemen or Ladies as I do not know your gender)

    If you wish to beleive this man is innocent that is your choice and I respect that. However please be so kind as to refrain from such pettiness as calling other people fools for beleiving otherwise. Learn to respect other people’s opinions more. :)

  32. Sherlock says:

    @koja

    First off I agree with Smith that name calling is absurd. Please lets all debate this rationally.

    I too know of Mike George from his Michigan days and always considered him the one to be guilty.

    In regards to the so called “Grief experts” as you put them: any one that doesn’t show grief over their spouse getting murdered could be construed as a state of shock yes. However continued lack of any grief being shown when around the detectives or even at the funeral does NOT help his case. Anyone who remains so glacially calm after their spouse being murdered elevates their suspect status in the eyes of the cops. The fact that he is the spouse automatically makes him the prime suspect in the first place. Lack of emotion hurts his standing even further.

    His lack of posting any reward or supporting the posting of any reward for information leading to the arrest, etc. of the killer also doesn’t help him. Seems odd to me. If it were my wife, you can believe I’d be ripping the planet itself apart if necessary to find the killer.

    But lets put all that about Mike aside for the moment.

    As to the Judge…well I can’t tell a Judge how to run their court, now can I? Nor can anyone else here for that matter. If the Judge feels some new data has come forth to warrant a new trial, so be it. Last I read about this was that supposedly a friend of Mike’s with a criminal past moved out of state a few days after the murder and was never investigated by the cops. This person is now deceased from what I read before information on the matter stopped by the Judge placing a media gag on the case.

    So, we have a dead man who can tell no tales now a potential suspect and any testimony about this man from his family and next of kin will be even more suspect then testimony about Mike. It’s easy to say what we want of a dead person who cannot defend themselves.

    Now as to the bearded individual with the Greek fisherman’s cap.

    I’ve heard about this person being mentioned. However, who was this person? What were they doing that was so “suspicious”? I’ve even heard tales that those that saw this person claim it was a fake looking beard. Are these people make up experts? Was the beard peeling off the person’s face? Was it attached to his face by hooks around his ears? Was this bearded person perhaps the friend of Mike’s that moved out of state just after the murder?

    Perhaps Mike paid this person to kill his wife? If so that still makes Mike guilty.

    Or perhaps Mike really is innocent. There is always such a chance, however slight it may be.

    Many of us that had worked for him in the Michigan days were suspect about the stolen box of comics ever existing in his store at all, and it seems weird that someone would be shot execution style over a box of lousy comics, while nothing else was taken from the store and the store undamaged. But then the world is full of strange things and even stranger people.

    Have to wait for the Michigan Supreme Court to make their decision and see what happens.

  33. i know one thing pat is right about cicumstaintial evidence,and a 4 and 2 year olds memory, of course the mother would say anything to excuse
    her son even when she says she had a good relationship with barb.
    i have seen what forensics are finding kill someone you will get caught!!!!!!!!

  34. I watched the Comic Book Murder and was highly surprised that he was found guilty. It is scary to think that a jury can put you in prison without any real proof, that could be any body even you.

Speak Your Mind

*