The Crime of Jeffrey Pyne 

My wife and I are no longer surprised (but still horrified) when we see persons of interest being interviewed by the police with no attorney present. Bad, bad idea.

One time on jury duty , I was surprised by the # (5?) of the "hang-em-high/SOMEBODY_MUST_BE_PUNISHED" types who were surprised by that. The Law&Order crowd were shocked, & suddenly figured out that talking to cops was a dangerous thing, *especially* if you were not guilty. ;) The cops' sketchy, & sloppy , tactics/procedures did serve an educational purpose. ;)

Word 🤐

A crime is only a crime if you are poor

@@EliCarter otherwise you will soon be paying atty fees. Though it's a fun card to play, huh

Right? You can't just "sort of compromise" when we are talking about locking up someone for decades... Truly horrifying.

I didn't even know spilt verdicts were allowed in some states, I just found that out a couple months ago. Our court system is not as great as everyone thinks.

Yeah it's bullshit, I hate that they can consider the lesser offences in a lot of trials, either they proved that you committed the offence that you are being charged with or they didn't. It just incentivizes the prosecutors to overcharge people regardless of the amount and strength of evidence because they have nothing to lose.

I know right, just settling for the 2nd degree murder option, as if one choose backup order at the dinner, when the menu item isn't available. Tssk, as long as the justice system is that idiotically carried out, I don't think death penalty should even be an option... And I admit that as a pro death sentence!

Only in Michigan

But the injuries to his hand and the access he had is more then enough to prove he did it!

@@chriskibodeaux9818 that’s categorically false.

@@someguy7576 but it’s not!

@@chriskibodeaux9818 more THEN enough? Don't you read books ever? It's more THAN. FFS

The problem with voting innocent is double jeopardy. I wish there was an option to actually vote for a mistrial but that only happens when a certain amount of jurors don't agree.

Welcome to "Blind Justice".

His alibi seemed made up and his hands looked like he was swinging a 2"x4" that's hardly NO evidence. however, I would not be able to convict him if I were on the jury even if I thought it was probably him. probably is not good enough evidence to convict someone

@@ichigen511 Yes but that doesn't tie him to the crime nor the location. It was too little evidence. The US still let's laymen decide over someone's fate. That's what you get when you use such outdated court proceedings.

I mean as the last person who saw her, his hands and behavior in the interrogation are very suspicous, but that isnt enough to put him in Jail.

He smacked her from behind....Of course he has no other wounds...She's a small gal and that guy just up and dollywhopped her in the ole noggin"!! I tell ya....

@@ichigen511 This is the problem with our Justice System in general these days. Court drama, the media and TV have literally programmed people into thinking that only the strictest of scientific evidence is required to convict someone in court. It absolutely does NOT. The word "reasonable" is used often during investigations and court but no one understands what it means. You are required as a juror to convict a person based on "beyond reasonable doubt"...that doesn't mean you need DNA or video evidence of the person charged. What it means in the most basic and simplest form is - Given the entirety of the case the prosection has put forth, do you reasonably believe the charged is guilty? Juries don't use their heads or common sense anymore and they expect the prosecution to do their job for them. It's sad but unfortunately true.

It's always annoyed me how people will hear something like a 911 call where someone is really calm and speaking clearly and immediately say "they're guilty because they're not having a breakdown and crying and screaming". These people don't understand shock and denial. Why is it so strange that someone hasn't been able to process the incident/trauma yet? Why do they have to react immediately, in the exact manner you expect them to?

@@frosty_teacup When tragedy has struck my life I tend to go into "automatic mode". I do what needs to be done with little display of emotion.

@@asphaltspreader I also go into automatic mode. I've always assumed it's bc I'm a nurse(RN)✌💖🇨🇦

Exactly. Grief/shock is expressed very differently, especially by people who've lived in a chaotic environment (like having a bipolar mother) or people who work under pressure or in intense situations (fire fighters, EMTs, construction, gamblers, elite athletes, etc.)

We all go through it differently

Why?

Understandably

My mother, and family friends, worked in the local (large city) DA's and Police departments. There was some incredibly messed up stuff I learned about. One of the most important things was NEVER marry a police officer 😂, and ALWAYS get a lawyer before talking to ANYONE!

More than say the saudi or russian system??

Nothing like sending someone to jail for 20 jail with no evidence to alleviate the guilt...

The prosecution caught the defence off guard and psychologically manipulated the juries. The judge shouldn’t have allowed second degree murder to be added by the prosecution in last minutes.

Just shows the horrifying stupidity and spinelessness of some juries. What's more at least one jurors has come forward and admitted that they regret their verdict.

Didn't follow the case, so I not sure if that's completely true. But if it is, the judge is an absolute mug. He should have never accepted that. Incompetent judges and an evil prosecution is a deadly combo (sometimes, quite literally).

It was a scummy despicable move. The justice system is an utter mess

Yes! I'm trying to figure out how someone can be found guilty of a crime with no evidence to suggest the committed the crime

It seems to come from an emotional place, more than anything else. I think the default setting is "if that person is here and accused of a crime..... they must have done it."

yes this one was crazy to me!! the burden of proof is just not there, like how did the jury decide this was outcome that truly brought justice??

This is exactly why we dont use a jury system in the Netherlands, because you let people who know nothing about the laws and are very easily manipulated decide the faith of people. Why?

You're right. Aren't jurors instructed about reasonable doubt? I don't understand how could they be sure he was guilty.

So…you’ve never heard of the holocaust?

@@hillaryh.5197 WTF does that mean? There was evidence for that.

@@chezceleste You’re right. You’re Smart!

wait. were you the other woman the ex was so pissed about?

@@hillaryh.5197 You're not!

indeed, i'd seen this case featured on ID channel, don't recall which of their shows, but damn he lost a ton of hair in the 2 years or so from the crime to trial and sentencing.

i can imagine itd do the same to you after your country turned its back on you. man these ones are infuriating.

Teenagers cause stress that takes a toll as well. I'm just saying...my constant stream of grey hairs can prove it.

@@JadedBelle Great point, noted.

@@eagleman1542 😂🫣

You actually sit through the whole trial and see the evidence, rather than basing your conclusion off a 24-minute video on youtube.

@@amityislandchum 25 minutes of no evidence is not different than 8 hours of no evidence. The length of the trial does not add plus one evidence to the accused. You understand what evidence is, right? It's not the short hand on a clock.

The better question is how do you judge a trial based off an entertainment youtube video?

@@flyingtentacle7631 And you know there was no evidence how?

@@amityislandchum jurors forget their instructions so many times. Even tho you may know he did it, you can’t convict if the evidence doesn’t point to him beyond a reasonable doubt. Even tho this guy probably did it. I would gladly say not guilty, because that is the best way for our system to work. It takes emotion out of their decision. Yet people are arrested and convicted this way every day

I am curious, is that cause for a new trial? It seems to me like it would be, but I am not fully informed.

I mean, if the family thought he was not guilty, and the family would be the ones who were most affected, why even charge dude? The rest of society has no stake in his trial. Odd.

@@hucklesnook1848 If it's not then it damn well should be. It's disgusting and reeks of corruption.

gotta stick someone in your privately run jails sure justice was done in the end he can make license plates for 60 cent a day while lawyer man gets to enjoy freedom

I think prosecutors planned that all along.

The Husband's Girlfriend did it, she heard the news about the divorce and killed her.

@@dr.decker3623 The husband’s girlfriend came to my mind too! I’m sure the police vetted her alibi though.

Oh, and always ask for a lawyer! Don’t tell cops or detectives anything. Keep your mouth shut!!

Good point.

Or Jeffreys ex girlfriend... How pleased did she look in court testifying against him?!

Bingo! My thoughts exactly!

@ Lida Thorn…she definitely came off as a jilted ex, but I don’t see her doing that to his Mom. She seems more likely to key his car or some sh*t like that. I do think he killed his Mom and that it was a result of pent up frustration of dealing with her bipolar disease. He probably would have been better off pleading temporary insanity.

YES!!! I thought the exact same! Wether she did it or hired someone larger. One hard swing with a 2 X 4 should get her on the floor. The rest seemed like very intense personal rage. My son is BiPolar and it took a long time to get that correct diagnosis and longer to find the right mix of 3 meds. He goes off them because he hates them. He has done things that another family, (strangers) would leap to judge as unforgivable including being violent to me. Despite that, no matter what, no exceptions, I could not raise a hand to my son, who is 22 … not even in self defense. Just as he did nothing to stop his Mom attacking him. That is what you do when a toddler throws a tantrum or a mentally ill person looses it and becomes combative. Broadly speaking, the bond in a happy home between Mother & Son is so deep. When you love someone differently wired or suffering a mental illness you absolutely understand their worst acts, worst mistakes or worst days do not define them. You almost love them more knowing how much they are suffering and how suicidal they will be once they are balanced back out and grasp the damage. We tend to train our men to mute emotion shown. I think he was in shock and he’s a guy and that is why he didn’t start screaming, collapsing and sobbing as I would. Small towns do not have the funding or experience of the metropolises. I didn’t hear that much effort was made to look at anyone else. Had I been on the Jury I think I would have said it was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. I get he is the most obvious guess, but I do Not believe it. As Mike pointed out, the attacker would have looked like Carrie and there was nowhere near enough time for him and his car to be flawlessly clean. I hope the Dad hires a Private Detective, gets home security of vehicles going close to all the houses anywhere in the greater area and works out sufficient new evidence for another trial. Anyway, just my personal position.

unfortunately most people on jurys are morons and care more about getting it over with then actually doing their job.

Or bloody footprints, or dna at the scene. The knife attack was personal. There would be cut fingers, or blood evidence on the individual. There was none on him.

dont think? then you are as useless as they were

To be fair to the prosecution (who were clearly a bit scared and playing dirty!), Jeffrey had several hours to dispose of evidence, such as a hazmat suit type deal, and to thoroughly wash himself. I believe that he had three hours.. Minus the one minute it took to make that alibi voicemail call. I think that he did do it. I think his mother was a living nightmare and is probably happier now herself (Ha?!). But a good defense is to have another place to point to for the crime. And, again to be fair, that was very difficult. * Defense attorney may have shot himself in the foot by asking all of the witnesses if they know who did kill Ruth

It was in his own house where he had access to other clothes. He could have put clean clothes in the garage before. He could have taken those and the weapons and disposed of them. He lied about where he was. If your mother got killed, when you realized you were a suspect, would you clear that lie up?

Well said!

Baretta did that S@$!..

She's disgusting?

He was crying because he knew he'd fucked up and hurt his father and sister. Oh, and because it hit him that he's going to be locked up for a long time.

Similar thing happened to me. My father passed 6/17/2013 while I was at work. Said I was fine for years and years, never shed a tear either, and today I'm still battling depression because of it. It took years for me to fully comprehend the situation I was and am in.

I didn't cry when one of my best friend's was killed on a freak train derailment. It took me days. I was just in shock. I probably showed little to no emotion. It wasn't until I was at the mall buying a dress for her funeral that I finally realized and broke down

Someone phoned me that my mother was not o.k. When I arrived at her house there was police who told me she passed away. My reaction: “can you look if there is Coca-Cola in the fridge”. Didn’t cry at all. But still miss her. Fortunately it turned out that there was no crime involved.

...not really its either you breaking down once you get the news or shock then crying, you can tell if its genuine shock or not

Males in particular, we usually don't instantly break down crying.

Agreed, one of the slimiest things I have ever seen a lawyer pull off. Shame on that judge for allowing it.

They knew they were going to lose this conviction. I believe that if they want to include the lesser charge of 2nd degree then it should be put forth from the beginning and or have a mistrial and start over with that but not allowed to include it at the end of the trial because the prosecutors knew they were losing that first degree murder conviction. This was wrong and I really hope someone takes up this case to help him get out and sue the prosecutors for malicious prosecution.

Without discussing the politics of the case, as a matter of black-letter law note that the recent Potter conviction likely only occurred because the Prosecution was able to redefine "Recklessness," as defined by both statute and case law, in its closing rebuttal without immediate correction by the judge. Absent that loosened definition the jury was allowed to use, there was no way for the agreed upon facts of the case to meet the actual legal standard.

They included cause they knew a not guilty was going to come back. It’s absolutely right given the choice between two options sealed his fate. Scary

I agree. With adding the “middle ground” of second degree murder it almost makes you feel like second degree murder is astronomically less worse when it’s just as bad. It puts you in a bad spot because of the very little evidence so it makes you feel like it’s the better option. As much as I want to say he’s not guilty I do however; have always felt like the true innocence or guiltily conscious comes forth when the person accused of the crime shows little fight to clear their name. This is my opinion but I just felt like he just wanted it all to end but couldn’t bring himself to admit to the murder so he just went with it. No appeal or fight to prove his innocence.

The Husband's Girlfriend did it, she heard the news about the divorce and killed her.

​@@dr.decker3623 allegedly

Absolutely guilty.

I agree with you 100% Erica.

@@mdcs1992 Troll elsewhere. This isn't a joking matter. Psychopaths need to troll on your way

You're welcome, I love doing what I do.

Not guilty

their strongest evidence was that spiteful ex

It wasn’t no evidence. There was evidence in this case pointing to him: He was the last to see her alive. He had intense abrasions on his hand on the same day of the murder, which matched with what someone wielding a blunt object would have. He was at the house alone with her the day she was killed. He left a bizarre voicemail to a neighbor which indicated he was trying to create an alibi. He showed no emotion during questioning, despite the fact that his mother was just killed. His reaction when told she was murdered was fake and without real shock or grief. That’s all evidence. Jurors get to give that evidence the weight they deem appropriate. Was it enough evidence to cast aside reasonable doubt? I don’t know. I wasn’t on the jury. Maybe not. But there was evidence.

@@annagitana1 The killer was the last to see her alive. Maybe that's him, maybe it's not. "Last to see them alive" is a lead for police to follow. It's not evidence. His "intense abrasions" are circumstantial. He had an explanation. We can buy it or not, but those injuries could not be linked to the crime. Not evidence. He lived in the house, yeah? He was in the house with her every day, more than likely. Certainly not evidence. Voicemail is not bizarre out of this context. There's something to the lilacs not being mentioned, maybe. In a world where he's innocent, this voicemail wouldn't stand out to anyone as unusual. He thought she'd be there, he called when she wasn't. Not evidence. Your perception is that he showed no emotion or whatever. People's reactions are not evidence. They're not even reliable hunches. See dozens of other examples. Not evidence. Your perception is that his reaction was fake. We have no way to know that, you're just making it up. Not evidence. The whole point of the comment you responded to was that there was no evidence. No murder weapon. No blood spatter. No cleanup. Nobody spotted him there. Nobody had reason to believe he would do such a thing. He never threatened her. No bloody footprints. Not one piece of tangible evidence whatsoever. I don't know if the guy did it (my gut says he did), but I don't think it's a high bar to have some evidence produced when we sentence folks to live their remaining useful life in prison. I think the addition of the 2nd degree was shady af, too. Prosecutors are forced to choose before trial for a reason.

@@annagitana1 that's all circumstantial at best. There was no hard evidence, just opinions and assumptions.

@@annagitana1 He actually did show emotion when they told him. I'm guessing you had an expected emotional response. People react differently. How can you tell that his reaction to being told she was murdered was fake? I had a very similar reaction upon hearing that a friend of mine had been murdered. There's no "one reaction fits all" with this. I do agree, most of what you mentioned is evidence. Personally, I'd need more that directly ties him to having committed the act.

I agree that would be something to look into, jealous,angry,envious girlfriend thinks o he is gonna leave his wife then told o by the way I'm not now...hell yeah would make anyone mad n upset, definitely enough to look into.

That's exactly what I was thinking. The brutality/anger of the killing was consistent with a lot of other jealousy-related killings. And the evidence against Pyne was completely circumstancial.

That’s a great point actually. They just glossed right over that huh.

@Christina McIntosh oooohhh thanks!

people, people, stopped being wowed by his looks. my god. the naivite...he had the skin lesions on BOTH hands the day of the murder. he swung the 2x4s...he simply got rid of the clothing he had on during the murder. prolly incinerated them or something. maybe one of those textile hazmat suits, that cover the entire body...the hand injuries make it obvious he did it and his co-workers testified to the unlikelikhood of such injuries arising from work duties. c'mon gals... he was sick of his mom's illness so he killt her. dad suffered too and knows deep down he did it. the whole family was tired of dealing with her and the dad had more allegiance to his son than to the wife he wanted to leave. i'm o.k. with the 2nd degree. i think honestly they got into an argument and he lost it, which would be in line with murder 2. no matter how much he couldn't stand her, i don't think he was really interested in killing her, i think he broke under pressure after having some kind of confrontation. no money motive, no planning. she went off on him and he grabbed the 2x4 and knife. it's not complex folks. the clothes he had on during the murder are still on that property. prolly buried under the lilacs.

There's a few imitators out there now.

Yeah it has nothing to do with him selling his soul and putting shows out there about lies about chemtrail and a whole bunch of other stuff he's doing the devil's bidding

It was the tinfoil hat for me

@@DaisyMae439 tf are you babbling about? 😆

@@NiecieSavo I don't expect dumbed down, mind controlled, zombie government slaves to understand or to hear or see what's really going on in this world!

I have done work at the homes of people who weren't home at the time.

@@glenbateman5960 Sure, but did you lie about doing work for them that you didn't do and they hadn't asked you to do? He told the police he had planted lilacs but he clearly hadn't.

How are you stumped? It’s obvious he murdered her

@DannyBZ9 I'm stumped why he would lie about it if he was innocent. This video makes a whole argument about his possible innocence, but that doesn't seem all that likely, as you pointed out.

@@syntext this comment section is delusional. He had plenty of motive & lied about his whereabouts during the murder. Also lied about his hand injuries confirmed by co-workers

It's a lesser included offense and it's the law in Michigan. As the prosecutor said, they're entitled to have it included. Not "allowed."

@@Preservestlandry And it is allowed to be introduced at any point in a trial? So any prosecutor can see his or her case going to s**t, and then just decide "you know what? I'm going to toss in this little conscience clearer for all you jurors"... that seems disgusting IF that is the case.

@@tylerskiss seriously he needs a whole new trial for that

@@hurpaderpp Jury and prosecutor got it right!

This trial was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

It also makes me wonder if they didn't find any other DNA on the mother. Because it was mentioned that she had defensive wounds. So didn't they find anything at all, like for an example under her fingernails?

@@ilalou941 If he used a 2x4, he would be farther away. Maybe too far for her to get at him.

@@bkbff Yeah except how do you explain there being no blood on his what so ever when he apparently laid down on her and stabbed her in the kneck 17 times?

why didn't they search the neighbors house...

Also if you stab someone 17 times, your hand can slip on the blood and cut yourself also... So maybe blood of the killer mixed with the victims on the victim...I wonder if anything was found like that

lol youre not very familiar with a chronic mental illness eh

I agree with you......

I think he did it but we'll never know why. However, I still have questions about how he disposed of the murder weapons and bloody clothing after the event.

@LemonZeppelin I'd say he did it as well, but in America, you must be proven guilty, beyond any reasonable doubt. I think there is more than enough reasonable doubt for him to have been acquitted.

@@AutomaticDuck300 went to local Y, showered and threw knife in dumpster

Well 'murica.

Uh,the hands? Nothing else could make such wounds than holding a plank for quite a while and beat senseless away for many minutes. And that lilac planting /fabricated alibi with out of place voicemail? And who in the whole world else were there that day? I say he snapped. A good liar never retract or confess.

My ONLY patreon subscription, and well-deserved

I heard him ask one one video for a sub, but that was it, despite watching nearly all his videos, mike is the man!

He has referenced the Patreon multiple times too, I don’t see anything wrong with that

Do you do your job for no pay? Of course smaller channels have to advertise and ask for subs. That’s how they get paid. And Mike is clearly part of a large team.

@@debshaw680 came here to say that. I don't think it's wrong to ask for people to subscribe if they like the content or support the patreon if they want to finance the channel. No one is making you fork out money but they need money to survive, pay bills, spend time researching these videos and cases, they prob take hours, days, weeks, months to create. Having to sit through hours of footage and court cases and news footage etc. Without pay? They definitely deserve it. And Mike and his team 100% deserve it. Unlike TV or streaming services a lot of these channels are not getting paid for each episode ot backed by a big network. Most channels ask for subscribers or patreon at the end or beginning of their videos. It's so easy to just skip through it.

100% AGREED The boy's "tell-tale" blisters are OLD--and the pallet at work tore them open--they were already there. Of course the other employees "never got that kind of injury from pallets" his blisters were there before he went to work. He's obviously fit--perhaps he had blisters from lifting and they got tore up at work. Per the pics, the skin around the blisters is old and cracked--OLD NEWS--nothing to do with his mother's murder.

A jealous mistress?! And she got into the house and garage with the victim how? And what - she happened to spot the 4 x 4 on the garage floor, and on a whim chose it as the murder weapon? And swung that unwieldy hunk of wood at the victim's head 20 times? Then belatedly decided to use the knife she brought with her too? Oh - and by the way, no one saw a woman covered in blood leaving the house? This is real life, not an episode of 'Columbo'! Though not even 'Columbo' would come up with a plot as nonsensical as that. Women very rarely commit murder. It's so rare that when it does happen there is strong motive, and they are quickly found out. I love that you assume police 'forgot' to investigate the husband's ex, like they're the Keystone Cops or something. Of course they interviewed her, as they will have kept an open mind and interviewed every known associate of the victim, in the earliest stages of the invitation. That's basic police work. And she will have been eliminated as a suspect in the early days too - and then the net closed in on the actual killer, the victim's son. Because unlike his dad's mistress, Jeffrey Pyne didn't have an alibi, but did have heavy blistering injuries to both hands from beating his mother to a bloody pulp with a rough length of wood. There's ample compelling evidence Pyne is the killer, and thank God the jury had sufficient critical thinking skills to recognise his guilt and reach the right verdict. Unfortunately, murderers don't generally take a selfie of themselves mid-crime. Jurors have to work hard to recognise a defendant's guilt or innocence. What's more, today's killers are very forensically aware, thanks to all the true crime cases and police/legal dramas featured in the media. That means the premeditated killers like this guy, can enact a pretty good cover up, obliterating forensic evidence. Again that makes it tougher for jurors to reach the right verdict. Pyne did very well avoiding getting his mother's blood on his body, clothes or car. That didn't point to his innocence, but to a very thorough clean up/cover up. Sadly for him, he couldn't do anything about the injuries he got to both hands on the exact same day as the murder (that would be one helluva coincidence!) or his total lack of alibi. The jury showed excellent judgement and took a dangerous man out of society, respect to them.

Oooooooo 😳Good thought!!! Didn’t think of that…. 🤭 Damn!

Or the girlfriend of jeffery? If she was so pissed about jeffery cheating, maybe she went over to hurt him but when he wasn’t home went for his mom. Like they mention in her interview she was talking about how he was a lier and a bad guy.

@@TheCrabbyCrafterlol Yes you can get blisters from lifting pallets without wearing gloves and especially if you've had previous blisters they can make it worst. Maybe he was the hardest worker at his job by being a young guy taking the pain of blisters and the other employees who said they never got blisters were lazy ass employees who stood around and did nothing all day.

Guilty is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt. It sucks that juries are set up in such a way, that they can't easily come to the conclusion that they don't know. Cannot be sure of guilt or innocence at this time, should be a verdict that a jury can decide upon immediately and that is encouraged systematically. At the moment the jury is punished for not knowing to a degree, and very strongly pushed towards a guilty or innocent verdict.

They probably hoped that he would reject a trial and opt for a plea bargain which often seem as some sort of gamble for purpose of having statistic of quickly solved crimes. Another thing I'm puzzled over are that they allow so-called charachter witnesses. The only interesting would be if the acvused have a record of being a repeat offender, have showed violent tendencies. If a guy or a girl are slutty is not much of relevance to a murder case, especially if it's not even a case of a lover or partner but a parent?!?!

I don’t think he did it at all and after the Rittenhouse trial I don’t trust prosecutor’s at all!

Not Hardly there is NONE!!!

@@ginaperez8139 - What are you talking about? He cheated on his girlfriend and she really really liked him, like a lot. Second-degree murder for that.

this is what had me thinking "okay, but what happened when they appealed this?" and then at the end he quickly said he was denied... i am surprised

I'm amazed people are unable to see this is a desperate play by the prosecution desperate for a W so they don't have to do a more thorough investigation. It's such an obvious horseshit request that they don't want to win on evidence, they want to win on technicality. But each W means a person is going to jail. I bet that guys case log is full of people who didn't do the crime they were accused of.

The difference between the US and the UK justice systems is just insane. This is actually horrifying. Innocent, guilty, or guilty but feeling a bit better with yourself if he's innocent

Widened. Goal post distance is widened. Field distance is lengthened.

You'd have to be delusional to convict someone for a jail term of 20+ years "just to be sure".

Plus--you can see he's physically fit--he may have had the blisters --BEFORE lifting the pallet at work that he said opened the PRE-EXISTING blisters-- that may be from lifting something heavy or doing something repeatedly--17 whacks with a 2x4 wouldn't make blisters that big or that fast--the skin around the blisters is old/cracked dry--those are "old" issues. And certainly not enough to warrant a prison sentence.

@@TheCrabbyCrafterlol Yes. And you could see a circle of the blistered skin. I feel so bad for him. To think he was convicted of it And he has to go to the pen. It made me sad. I'm 60 and he's still young. I truly hope he wins an appeal. The judge was so wrong to let them include the other charge beings that there was no real evidence.

His blisters are more consistent with pressure from lifting heavy things. He should contact a medical expert

Megalul people trying to defend a kille4

It's a failing of the judicial system that a random selection of people are the deciding factor in whether or not you lose your freedom. Juries should be chosen from a competent pool of legal professionals, not the uneducated masses.

Outrageous to throw a man in a cell for the rest of his cell.

@@michaelcarlin7806 agreed. It’s not right without knowing without a doubt someone is guilty. Makes me sad for the family.

Overwhelming circumstantial evidence. The jury got it right.

He sooooo did it.He has dead eyes and was just a narcissistic Spoiled brat!!!

@@nealkelly9757 What was this "overwhelming circumstantial evidence?"

My thoughts were what about the other woman the dad was starting to see before the mom decided to take her meds so he wouldn't leave her? How did she take to the fact he wasn't going to leave and go to her anymore? Was the mistress actually questioned/looked at that much?

@@Pocket_Sora · Oh yeah, she wasn't even mentioned! I hope they did look into her!

We missed you! Been watching every single video since start Love you and love Ireland!

Hope COVID isn't hitting you hard Mike. Seem to be doing ok

Same to you, my Holidays sucked fr but that's cause I've lost my mum so it'll never be the same

@@katiecheser1970 sorry for your loss!💜 lost both of my parents😢 YES Mike missed you seemed like forever lol..HAPPY NEW YEAR MIKE AN ALL ON HERE

You too

And the prosecution was like "Hmm, they're probably not going to give 1st degree because there is no evidence.... Let's tell 'em they can do 2nd, that should work". That, to me, is terrifying.

@@Breakbeat. It smells more like "we want to win" and not like "what's the truth".

It's happened way too many times since our judicial system was formed.

@@NoTeefy God, I wish I were surrounded by more people with that mindset. I find it truly terrifying - not to mention heartbreaking - how much of a failed state the US really is.

It also further rips a family apart and stunts the healing process from this horrifying crime. May she RIP and may her son have freedom.

I think he did it. I think he had years of pain and baggage. When his mother started taking her meds, i doubt she was remorseful of the way she was. Probably tried to act like a lot of things weren't said, leaving Jeff with his emotions. And he couldn't stand to watch her go on like everything was just fine.

@@NoNo_IStay I’m not saying he didn’t do it. I’m saying there isn’t enough evidence to convict

@@NoNo_IStay well their is no evidence that provided guilt also the police did not look outside the family they tunnel visioned him just because a person isn’t a good guy doesn’t mean he is a murder they gave very bad evidence that could be destroy in the eyes of any *cough* *cough* smart person sorry but it’s clear their is no evidence that connects him to the crime I’m not saying he’s innocent but he definitely shouldn’t of been given a guilty verdict as this was a highly inappropriate/corrupted case honestly it seem the police just didn’t want to put effort in and tried to put blame fast sadly that is the harsh truth of the court system

@@josephdalessio2075 This. No matter if he did or didn't do it. This was a conviction on him having otherwise explainable blisters and "feelings". Thats not enough to put someone away for decades.

@@theexchipmunk exactly !

Interesting, I thought it could just as easily be interpreted as him being guilty--overwhelmed with regret and grief over what he put his father through. Either way this case was a sham, whether he did it or not

casey anthony cried when her father just spoke with her lol...

@@acooper7675 that’s what I was about to say lol

Im sorry ...he did it those injuries to his hands are exactly what you would expect from swinging a lump of wood and hitting something or someone. ..pallets ? I don't think so

So he is innocent because of how he looks? Hmm yeah that's a good way to go about judging someone's guilt almost worse than conviction with out evidence

The cops/prosecution was so eager for a conviction, any conviction. That and as we have seen so many times on this channel cops tend to be useless. They didn't even try to find the real killer.

@@craigh5236 cops and prosecutors don't decide who's guilty. Morons that are too stupid to get off of jury duty decide that. That should answer the question on how people can find someone guilty with 0 evidence.

Name one other person who would have beaten a 51 year old woman to death? This HAS to be personal. Its overkill and strangers dont do that. Ever.

@@Mikael-jt1hk It's not what you know, it's what you can prove.

Check under her fingernails!!!!

Seems really unfair

It's more common than we know. It's not unusual for men to go to prison for being someone nobody likes, but not actually being guilty. Or for guilty people to walk free because they are likeable. Justice is not blind and judges should never be elected (it causes political leans). Anyone who gets a paycheck should face the possibility of getting fired for poor work.

@@TheKenton I fully agree. I see this in a lot of professions…people being absolved of accountability. Whatever happened to the saying: with great power comes great responsibility? Seems like it’s changed to: with great power comes great power and no accountability.

@@rhythmnblues9195 With great power comes money and you can do a lot with it to avoid accountability.

@@TahtahmesDiary This is correct. Also your hair is to die for if this is you in your thumbnail.

meanwhile in the ritten house trial they weren't allowed to talk about his character at all. Surprised this man got convicted with no evidence.

The judge didn't offer 2nd degree, the prosecution did.

@@user-fk5zf1ei6f I don't know for sure but I think it's up to the judge if he will allow it. Like and objection.. over ruled or sustained. That's why they both plead their cases why it should or shouldn't be allowed..

@@dans8149 correct, it was a motion by the prosecution and the judge allowed it. It’s on the judge. He shouldn’t have.

@@AmexL The judge is a judge because of many years in college, law school etc. His allowing the motion was correct. And will standup to every appeal and technical question. There is STILL a victim. She won't suddenly rise from the grave regardless of her son's incarceration status. Believe it or not. Bitte...

If they were offered a second degree verdict, but still took three days to even choose that verdict, it definitely seems like there was plenty of doubt going on in that jury room.

I don't know, he didn't have an alibi, wounds on his hands from someone who might have been swinging a 2x4 around, the suspicious sounding voice mail he left. Probably not enough to convict him, but it's not like he's squeaky clean.

@@reignman30 so what if you don't have an alibi? People do spend time alone and you don't have to prove you didn't do it, the state has to prove you did.

@@reignman30 What country are you from?

@@reignman30 you're right, you don't know.

@@IChIDH I mean...in your mothers murder case, don't you want to be as forthcoming as you can? Being vague n lying about what you was doing is FOR SURE going to make you look guilty. Whether or not you actually are, that's called having common sense.

Exactly. What’s worse? Letting a guilty person go free because the prosecution didn’t prove their case or sending an innocent person to jail for decades without presenting any physical evidence pointing to their guilt by adding a lesser included charge at the last minute to ensure that a jury who was struggling with a verdict had something to convict the person of? I personally think convicting an innocent person with no physical evidence is far worse. And the ability to add second degree murder at the last minute when they realized they were losing should be criminal.

@@beautifulsurprise9424 Tell that you the many criminals that have been guilty of crimes and are allowed to walk free only to keep committing crimes and even end up killing people. Like that guy at the Wisconsin parade?

@@sailorarwen6101 I'd rather take the risk of letting 100 guilty people go than take away decades (or, in some cases, their entire life) from 1 innocent one. There is no excuse for innocent people going to jail with modern forensic and investigative methods, absolutely none. If he is innocent, and even if he gets out (and remember, he's serving at least 20 years, but could potentially serve up to 60), his life is likely already ruined beyond repair because the cops didn't do their jobs. There's no excuse for that

I hope he stays in. He's clearly guilty. Trust your fellow man. He did it!

He referred to her in the present tense through the interrogation. He hadn't processed that she was dead. If he did that on purpose it's a remarkable bit of attention to detail. I mean, difficult not to screw that bit of acting up.

Agree 100%

We are in hard times. If you can, try to take your eyes off the crazy world and your circumstances and turn them to Jesus. He is our only hope and our best friend in times of depression. I am a living witness. He will comfort you and lift you up. ~The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. ~ Pslam 34:18 Praying for you. 🙏

Hang in there. Just remember depression is a liar and is not who you are.

@@hootiewhooo1434 Wise words. Lying cheating bastard it is

10:00 But what about those messed up hands tho? And that sketchy voice mail to his neighbor? And that silent reaction to ur MOM was MURDERED?? If someone told me my MOM was MURDERED, I would be like omg wtf happened!! How !! Do u know who did it? Where!! Omg !! Omg omg!! My mom!! And I know my kids who are 17, 18, and 24 would definitely be flipping out wanting to know wtf happened and all of my friends would even be screaming wtf happened! But this dude jus covers his face while peeking thru his fingers. Lol 😂 that’s shady as hell lol. But those messed up hands was the biggest kicker for me.

Can’t refute that, but his injuries to his hands alone are a great indicator of what he did, and not to mention, it wasn’t like it was a robbery, nothing was stolen. Dad had a solid alibi and he didn’t. He was home at the same time frame the mother was murdered.

@@boobookitty1441 four words: beyond a reasonable doubt You better be 100% sure if you're going to put someone away for such a serious crime and you're joking if you say you're 100% sure despite there being no physical evidence. It's all just vague and circumstantial, or based on how you think someone should react despite everyone reacting differently when grieving. I'd be concerned if you were on my jury panel given I tend not to be super emotional and I'm generally really reserved. You'd probably think I'm a killer just because I didn't burst out in tears screaming

@@skyflores9827 just minor blisters on his hands though? For such a violent crime? And apparently she had defensive wounds so she must have fought back in some way. And there was no blood on him or anything. Surely that's enough doubt to rule out a conviction given the "beyond a reasonable doubt" thing

@@SuperNuclearUnicorn if 12 jurors came to decide he’s guilty , then they had evidence… and it’s not just about the way he reacted .. he has huge blisters on the inside of his palms.. says guilty to me! I’ve watched hundreds of interrogations and I’ve never once saw someone “innocent” with blisters on the inside of their hands. That came from stabbing with great force over and over and hitting her over and over. Even his coworkers said there is nothing, absolutely nothing that would cause blisters on his hands at work. And that was his excuse. Lmao.. and as far as the second degree murder charge, I feel the jury chose this bc he was abused his whole life and this death was a result of that. The judge gave him the most years possible bc even he knows this dude is guilty. And if u don’t know he’s guilty then I feel bad for u bc I bet u are the most gullible person in the world 🤦‍♀️

"Can't be sure" definitely doesn't add up to "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."

That’s the way to do it.

1) you need to say “I want/demand a lawyer” as what you said isn’t definite enough for the court. “get me a lawyer, dawg” was ruled not demanding a lawyer because the cop thought he meant a literal lawyer dog. 2) with cases like these cops prey on a very vulnerable loved one. his mother was just brutally murdered and the cops undoubtedly framed their questions as “helping to find her killer” since he was a vital part of the timeframe. especially if you believe you have a clear alibi/no forensically reasonable possibility and don’t already mistrust police.

Always be honest with police. Tell no lies. And if you’re a suspect, tell NOTHING. If you’re caught in lies you look suspicious, and if you’re a suspect they’re TRYING to catch you so don’t give ‘em shit.

@@keircampbell9374 never speak to the cops. They do not determine your guilt or innocence.

@@keircampbell9374 that's yhe problem they will almost ALWAYS make you out to be or seem as the suspect. You could be the MOST innocent person but they'll attack you anyway. Guilty, confused or innocent ALWAYS ask for a Lawyer!

HI to you too!!🦘🇦🇺

Hello ..... I love crime stories too and like you, would never do anything similar.

Watching from the United Kingdom 🇬🇧

Nice to meet you Nicholas, Happy New Year.

Confirming your suspicion: I'm from Morocco and every time I go to a supermarket or somewhere with CCTV I find myself fighting the urge to buy bleach, gloves, a shovel and plastic bags for my never-going-to-happen murder and the following That Chapter video about it

his hands proved he was guilty

@@lyricberlin his hands prove nothing. I’ve had blisters exactly like this working construction. It does however give a POSSIBLE piece of the story. As in like “maaaaaaybe his hands could have been injured in this way. And this be his only injury sustained during a brutal murder” But also, his voicemail to his neighbor was pretty sketchy.

He defiitely didn't get a fair trial at all with that last minute second degree charge tacked on. I thought for sure he'd win an appeal shortly after but it was denied. Even if he did do it, he didn't get a fair trial whatsoever the first time around.

@@lyricberlin I disagree. I think the hand injuries with other supporting evidence would definitely make him guilty, but other evidence seems to steer away from this theory. I am not saying he isn’t guilty, he may be, but look at Casey Anthony. There was a lot more evidence pointing right at her than this guy and she was acquitted (because her jury wasn’t all that bright and believed her lawyers tall tales in my opinion)

@@lyricberlin those blisters really don’t prove anything…

rather see a guilty man walk than an innocent man convicted

There was. Mike* mentions they asked other employees about it, and they said they had never received or seen an injury in the area. I’m paraphrasing, but it was something to that effect.

The ‘planting lilacs’ thing on the day he said which turned out to be a lie is a worry, but not proof. The injuries cannot be proof of anything bad if the weapon used to bludgeon her was not found. Darn strange one. More to be heard about this one day I feel.

@@joshchavez8190 but once again that isn’t proof he is lying.

About the only shady thing he did, was to lie about going to his ex's place. That was dumb as hell. This is why you don't talk to any police, for any reason, without an attorney.

And the judge allowed it! It’s terrible what our so called justice system does.

Sooo I agree Like I don't know this family But I'm PISSED HE DID NOT COMMIT THAT MURDER! THEY SHLD LOOK AT OLE DADS EX THAT HE DATED WHILST HE WAS ON THE BREAK!

And yet others who are obviously guilty (with evidence) walk away.

It happens all the time

@@freeflyer151 the injustice system is just another money making scheme.

He does it as a job, why wouldn't he do it well?

@@mircat28 I dont know how many people do you know have jobs and dont put in their best effort?? Some people dont have good work ethic..

Not everyone that does a job, does it even remotely well, I think anyone can relate to that. So, I think he deserves the positive comments, and will second them. Thank you Mike for all the quality and in depth content you put together, it is a treat for all us consumers of it, that think the fact you do a good job is more than just what anyone would do.

I, for one, have done terrible things at work. Wouldn't hire me, that's for sure

Happens all the time. Todd Mullis is Innocent too

Take a look again at the Chris Watts case. He was involved in a plot to kill his wife, but it involved at least two other people. And yet they walk free and he serves life in prison. Red X crime files has an outstanding series about this, with digital evidence, gps info, cell phone pings, routers, and screenshots from cell phones, etc.

Except his finger blisters from wood….

@@marys3127 Who else do you think was involved? I know about Kessinger, but I can't recall a 3rd

@@frosty_teacup I saw a video of the ring doorbell and someone in a white t shirt was running from the house and Nicole's cell phone pinged in that area. She has some major connections... It's insane she got off Scott free.

Makes one wonder if he had a more violent helper and he is keeping his mouth shut. 🤔

Witnesses are consistently the weakest forms of evidence, and people will mis-remember or overestimate their abilities (like their ability to know every person moving in the area) all the time.

what you said, makes the def. of reasonable doubt. think pple are confused what that means exactly. The jurors had to agree a reasonable doubt anyone other... than him could of done it.

Yeah, it's either "oh you showed no emotion, you're guilty!" or "those are crocodile tears, you're guilty!" You can't win.

I was arrested for weed in indiana as an adult, I have friends that have been arrested and had to do community service, some actually went to jail. I plead guilty and couldn’t help but break down crying any time I spoke, the judge was so nice to me and I got off with just a fine of 400 dollars which is insane but I genuinely believe crying got me a lighter sentence haha I did t do it on purpose though and I think it was obvious I was in distress. The judge even told me “sweetie you aren’t guilty until proven guilty in the court of law, plead not guilty okay?” Lol

My mother died when I was 18. I loved my mother very much. But I didnt cry. I didnt when my sister or father died years later. I just dont cry. I dont know why. I guess because it doesnt solve things, I dont know.

He hadn't talked to a lawyer yet when he was Mr cool being interviewed.

There absolutely IS 'physical evidence'! For starters the injuries to his hands sustained on the day of his mother's murder, the fact he had no alibi, and his blatant, bad acting when he left the suspicious message on a neighbour's ansafone, setting up a false alibi. The lack of blood evidence is interesting. Taken in context with the rest of the evidence it does not indicate Jeffrey Pyne's innocence, but rather that the crime was pre-planned. If the killer just wanted the victim dead, they could have chosen a non-bloody method like strangulation/asphyxiation. But there's more to this homicide because it's personal. The fact the killer wanted to inflict a prolonged and violent death on her with 'overkill' (stabbing her long after she was dead), points to a crime of passion and an existing relationship/emotional investment between murderer and victim. So we can assume that the method of murder was important to the perpetrator. I believe the garage was chosen as the scene of the crime for strategic reasons to do with not being discovered during the attack, and achieving a successful, post-murder clean up and cover up afterwards. The garage location suggests premeditation. I suspect Pyne lured his mother out there on some false pretext, where he was waiting with the two murder weapons, the length of wood and knife. He had obviously pre-planned the blood clean up, and it was successful - police couldn't link him that way. Some commenting assume that's impossible for a killer to do, but this and other murder cases prove it isn't! Today's killers are frequently true crime fans and forensically aware, thanks to all the popular big and small screen police and legal dramas (and true crime channels like this one!) The western world is obsessed with murder. Pyne may have ambushed the victim in the garage in just his underwear or even naked, and after killing her put his bloody boxer shorts in a bin bag for imminent disposal. He could have successfully made it to a nearby hot shower (he may even have set the shower running before the murder, so as not to touch any dials with bloody hands), wearing clean footwear he'd prepared in advance so as not to leave bloody footprints in the house). He later disposed of that footwear, because the inside of it would contain the victim's blood, in the same garbage bag with the bloody boxers. Hey presto - Pyne didn't have victim blood on him, or deposit any inside his vehicle. Contrary to popular misconception it is totally possible to achieve, it just takes pre-planning and preparation. And if you're committing a premeditated murder, you absolutely should pre-plan the cover up too. That's where so many killers slip up, they don't second guess what could catch them out and avoid it. But unluckily for Pyne he couldn't hide the very visible and severe injuries he sustained to both hands while killing his mother, and he couldn't manufacture a convincing false alibi either. He didn't have a genuine one because he was the killer. This crime features lots of circumstantial evidence, which IS evidence and in a strong configuration can powerfully indicate guilt. The location of the murder inside the home/garage points to Jeffrey Pyne - there was no break in, and common sense tells us the victim at least knew her killer and probably lived with him. Detectives eliminated her husband due to a solid alibi, and her young daughter, a child, could not overpower an adult with a length of 4 x 4. That only left Jeffrey - so how was his relationship with his difficult, mentally ill mother? That's a critical question. His mother was so abusive in the home with her deliberately un-medicated bi-polar issues, his father had been trying to divorce her. She must have been a nightmare to live with. We know there was at least one previous confrontation between mother and son, because that fight a year before the murder was confirmed in court and not disputed. I believe there were many more such incidents, and that their relationship had been rapidly deteriorating in the run up to her death. But the only people who could confirm the true nature of their relationship to police were those who lived with her, ie her killer son and her husband, neither of whom were going to implicate him for her murder. His father may well believe he's guilty, but doesn't want his son to die in jail. Having experienced the victim's abuse first hand, he no doubt identifies strongly with his suffering at her hands. There was ample reason for the jury to find Jeffrey Pyne guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt and thank God this group of twelve had sufficient critical thinking skills to do just that. They have taken a dangerous man off the streets. Because to be capable of such prolonged, deadly violence against a close female relative shows Pyne cannot be trusted and could do it again. As someone else here remarked with insight, mental illness often runs in families. Many of the comments on this video show worrying naivete and a serious lack of understanding of the justice system. The truth is, even with advances in forensic technology, it simply isn't possible to 100% definitively prove someone committed a murder. Even if they confess to it, they could be lying and covering for the real killer! In the absence of that incontrovertible proof we have established the jury system and the concept of 'reasonable doubt'. It's imperfect of course, because all systems created and run by humans are imperfect. But I believe it's the best we can do, and overall it has been successful, removing many highly dangerous people from society. Killers don't have horns and a tail - they are often the most apparently placid and mild mannered of men who you wouldn't suspect. Their friends and relatives will typically say of them: "He wouldn't hurt a fly", but they couldn't be more wrong.

@@glamdolly30 Although I agree with many of your points - "overkill" being exclusive to existing emotional relationships is also a fabrication of the TV/film/True Crime industry. Many stranger attacks are very brutal involving force more excessive than that required to kill a person.

@@nomadpurple6154 Context is all. In the context of this crime, in which there's no evidence whatsoever to hypothesise a stranger killing, the violence supports a case of matricide by her son.

@@glamdolly30 Everything you said there is valid and to be given proper attention in a trial, but it is very important to understand also that ANY nut could have knocked on the door, be let in pr push her in and overpower her and attacked her that day. The things you pointed to are not enough circumstantial evidence to PROVE BEYOND a reasonable doubt, that he was guilty. This, I'm afraid, is where you've missed the entire point of that reasonable doubt part in that sentence. Thinking he COULD HAVE done it, and even being able to figure out ways a person COULD HAVE done it without leaving more evidence, still DOES NOT ESTABLISH his GUILT above the bar of beyond a reasonable doubt. If you have doubt, and yes, even you would have had a hard time convincing yourself that you could convict him and feel comfortably sure he deserved decades in jail you'd be condemning him to serve, because that is when all those doubts about the other thousands of killers who roam the streets loose in America every single day, the contract killings that someone could have arranged , the things some jealous mistresses and vindictive ex girlfriends have done would've reared their pesky heads and been dancing all over your conscience all night every night making you have enough doubt maybe. There's far too good a chance, too many possibilities, that you've reached (a well meaning perhaps,) conclusion that is not foolproof or factual enough for a guilty decision. This is why the clause 'beyond a reasonable doubt' is in the sentence. The facts known here are not enough to take away someone's freedom and find them guilty, lock them in a cell. To me, more than a tiny bit of doubt is too much when you're asking us to condemn a person for life, in effect.

@@KathyHussey063 But police will have looked into the possibility of a (statistically highly unlikely) stranger murder, and discounted it through lack of evidence! However there IS evidence against the victim's son Jeffrey Pyne. You might as well say the accused's grannie, or his long lost uncle, or you or I could have killed that woman. In theory any person in America that day could have done it - that's why we train and pay professional police officers to do professional detective work to identify the actual killer. I'm sorry, but the level of argument here is poor and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the justice system and the concept 'reasonable doubt'. I sincerely hope you're never on a jury.

I have 4 subscribers

It’s for new subscribers

yeah forreal.. and she 100% seamed to be vengeful

@@Mr_Meowingtons - Plot twist. She framed him. =D

@@dawnroberts3626 Why was she even there? The cheating has nothing to do with this case anyway.

@@dawnroberts3626 What misogynistic terms were used here?

@@dawnroberts3626 lol, what, which terms you saw there? She shouldn't be there and she just looks like an angry person who decided to blame an ex for every sin of this world, it's pathetic what US courts look like.