Dr. Colin Linehan’s Wife Mechele Speaks During Her Murder Trial

610x Dr. Colin Linehan’s Wife Mechele Speaks During Her Murder Trial Photo

Dr. Colin Linehan behind wife, Mechele (daylife.com)

In October, 2007, Mechele Linehan, wife of Dr. Colin Linehan a family practitioner in Olympia, WA, was convicted of premeditated murder for a million-dollar insurance policy payout.  Kent Leppink’s case, a fisherman in Alaska and the murder victim, reached national attention being featured on the CBS documentary show, 48 Hours Mystery.

In 1996, Leppink met Mechele Linehan at a stripclub, the Great Alaska Bush Company, where she worked as a nude dancer.  Initially, a forensic psychologist testified of her community involvement and vegetarianism which worked in Linehan’s favor of not being a suspect.  However, Leppink’s letter to his parents stated his fear of being murdered and naming those who would be involved, Linehan was one of them.

Mechele Linehan was given a maximum sentence of 99 years in prison. She holds a Master’s of Public Administration and has one daughter, Audrey Linehan.

According to Vitals.com, highly rated Dr. Colin Linehan completed Tulane University School of Mdicine and is affiliated with Madigan Army Medical Center in Tacoma, WA.


  1. Dr. Colin Linehan’s Wife Mechele Speaks During Her Murder Trial: Share this on del.icio.usDigg this!Buzz up!Stu.. http://bit.ly/1efzrp

  2. Free Mechele says:

    FreeMechele.com is run by friends and family of Mechele Linehan with occasional input from Mechele’s husband, Colin. Mechele was convicted in October 2007 of conspiring to murder Kent Leppink. She is currently serving time on a 99-year sentence awaiting appeal. We believe in her innocence.

    Please be aware that this site is heavily moderated. Only positive sharing on the journey to true justice will be the focus here.

    We have the deepest condolences for the Leppink family, but believe a mistake has been made in finding the person(s) responsible for the death of their son.

    This is their latest Post

    I got a lot of response to the shows that were on in the last few days! Only one was negative and as we have stated before, this is a positive blog created for her friends, family and supporters therefore no negative responses will be posted. But it was refreshing to only get one, compared to the several positive ones! I try not to be affected by negativity but it is so hard when I know Mechele so well and know how totally unfair this situation is. For perfect strangers to pass judgement when they do not even know all the facts seems surreal to me. But because of you wonderful individuals who have taken time from your own lives to support us puts the negativity into propert perspective. Mechele called Friday night and is doing fine. She is anxious to get back into the “Dog Program.” For those of you who do not know what this is, I will explain. Selected inmates are chosen to take dogs who have been abused or abandoned or classified as “unadoptable.” These animals are with them 24/7 and they work with them for six weeks and participate in a “graduation.” Good homes are then found for them and the process begins anew. All of the “unadoptable” ones that Mechele has gotten have found loving homes with wonderful families. Hopefully she will be back in this program around the end of Dec. If any of you have questions that you would like me to personally answer please feel free to email me at msylady@yahoo.com. Sometimes it is hard to post individual answers here on the blog. Please keep in mind that certain issues cannot be discussed due to our pending appeal. But I will try to resolve any questions that anyone has to the best of my ability. Not to sound redundant, but my sincerest thanks to each and every one of you who has chosen to support my daughter. It really does help us through the dark times. And, remember, copies of this blog are sent to Mechele. It helps her so much to know there are people out there who truly believe in her!!! Bless each and every one of you!

  3. Stefanie says:

    I watched Mechele’s story last night on 48 Hours Mystery and was completely stunned when I discovered that she was found guilty and sentenced the maximum penalty. My personal opinion, based on that broadcast, is that she was found guilty because of her past and not on any solid evidence. It seems she made several questionable decisions years ago…but don’t we all when we are young? I feel that had she not been a dancer and beautiful, she may have been treated more fairly…perhaps she would not have even been considered a suspect. I am thankful that I have never been on trial where my own reckless past might be held up to a microscope. She continued on in her life and became a successful woman, and I didn’t feel that was given much attention. In my opinion, Mechele handled the interviews with dignity and intelligence. I pray that justice will be served.

  4. Veronica Fonteyn says:

    Having viewed the television documentary “Snapped” on Mechele Linehan’s case and having heard her early police investigation interview, there are, in my opinion, two key “incriminating” factors that a perceptive and skilled criminal psychologist would detect as evidence of guilt. These elements are (i) her question “Where is he”. What is actually being said in the subtext is “I know where he is but I am leading you off the scent by letting you believe I have no idea where he is therefore I have no connection to his murder – in other words I am hoping to persuade you that I am innocent”
    (ii) the immediate “sobbing” on being told her friend had been found dead. If one is a keen observer of human behaviour one will know that a genuine sobbing response does not occur with such immediacy. It takes the human brain/emotional connection more time to process the information and to evoke such an emotional response like a sob. This is a “turning on of the tap” type response which emanates from a previously prepared thought process – a prepared visualisation of how to respond. In other words, it is a prepared and acted response. Again the subtext is “I want you to believe that I am so upset I cannot possibly be guilty”. This is a scientifica/psychological explanation for the behavioural responses of a guilty person trying to lead her interviewer off the scent of her guilt. This is what good police hunches are made of. That is, long years of being involved in investigating cases and, in the process, observing human behaviour and then making the connections with the final result – often with the corroborating facts of the forensic evidence.
    However, having said this, I wonder what the reason is for the judge having punished Mechele with such a harsh sentence of a term of 99 years imprisonment. I could understand such a harsh sentence being imposed if she were a dangerous psychopathic serial killer who poses a real danger to the community. This woman has moved on from some foolish youthful albeit serious mistakes to become a useful, law-abiding citizen. By all means she needs to be punished for her role in the crime, but hardly 99 years. Where is the rehabilitation element in such a sentence. This is a sentence that has all the hallmarks of revenge and vindictiveness.
    It was also interesting to observe the body language and somatic features of the judge when he sent down the sentence. The pursed lips semi-concealed under the beard are a real give away of a very tough, mean, moralistic man. The slow controlled pace of the voice with which he delivered the sentence are also a dead-ringer for revealing a cold, controlling and harsh person.
    Human nature is so complex and I guess the luck is often in who you get to judge you.
    I do hope that an appeal will come down lighter on this woman next time.

    Veronica Fonteyn
    New Zealand

  5. Jane says:

    I find it interesting that Mechele’s blog supporters continue to spam the comments sections of any articles on the internet regarding this case with their messages linking to the blog, or anonymous ‘support’ messages pretending to be members of the general public (but seemingly in possession of a large amount of the ‘facts’ as Mechele sees them).
    If anyone is interested in your supporters blog I am sure they will find it. But a campaign of devious misinformation puts her supporters in the same category as religious zealots.

    I do empathise with her husband and daughter but I see her husband as another victim of her manipulation.

    Mechele was not convicted because she was a beautiful dancer. She was convicted by 11 of her female peers based on testimony and evidence which you probably haven’t bothered to read.

  6. Leeley Sarasota says:

    (It seems so bizzare that a grown woman still talks like a baby…) Of course, ‘friends and family’ are going to support–that is why there are people who independently analyze the case. And, of course, circumstantial evidence, is, just that, circumstantial- (most people who plot try NOT to leave an easy trail–things like ‘the Seycheles is the best place to go to avoid extradition’ is not something that comes up much in most friendly casual emails between ‘friends’ not to mention it’s best not to mention WHAT the extradition might be for–probably best just to understand that its about that ‘nasty incident’..). The prosecution should be commended for not rushing into it w/out VERY solid ‘circumstantial’ evidence. It is so very sad to see the people around her who require therapy from being under her ‘spell’ (husband, daughter..) the only time she appeared not to be the ‘seductress w/ the bedroom eyes’ was sitting in front of the judge realizing what had just happened after being convicted. Although her sad justification for ‘stripping to earn money for school’, probably didn’t sit well and insulted the women listening who worked their way through school w/out being naked-hmm…2,000$/night or 10.50/hr. waiting tables…; it is far too superficial and flippant to say that that was why they convicted her..No, I don’t think so. The evidence was powerful. Even in the 48hrs. interview when SHE raises the question suggesting ‘the old 40yr. old men’ were just responding to her innocence and naivete–it was turned around on her “yes, exactly–why did they if they weren’t lead on to believe they were ‘fiancees’”, she ridiculously didn’t realize she dug her own hole (I’m sure the FEMALE reporter made her uncomfortable as well) and immediately says, “boohoo-that mean lady is ‘attacking’ me!” (She might have as well said, ‘men on the set rescue me!!) Perhaps, yes, the men in her life at that time should have used their brains when thinking they could have found the love of their life– in a strip club– living with 3 other men.. As far as becoming the stellar citizen of Olympia, Washington? It seems that she felt financially ‘stable’ nailing a doctor–no more of the unpleasant business of hurting others for financial gain. Nor does becoming a pillar of the community erase that moment in time that stopped for a man in Hope forever. Whoever did that-and it does point to her and Carlin-should have to account for that moment no matter what they have done or become that is the essence of justice for the victim.

  7. Dr. Scott Smith says:

    The appeal will have to eliminate the life insurance policy in addition to Mr. Leppink’s letter and Ms. Hughes work as a stripper as facts in evidence. I agree with comment posted by Leeley Sarasota, above, although I would be less kind and diffident about Ms. Hughes guilty status.

    Ms. Hughes should refrain from such statements as “it hurts me that someone would think I would harm their child” (oh, vomit) refrain. The disdain, hostility, and arrogance she exhibited for the whole process demonstrated denial and an inability to realize she is way out of her league in her capacity to exude innocence. She proved to be her own worst enemy.

    She may have been able to use her wiles to manipulate three unattractive, acutely gullible, below-average loser males and one genuinely good husband, but elevating herself into middle-class white-collar status from a white-trash blue-collar lifestyle is no defense against the role she played in causing Mr. Leppink’s death. For that, she must suffer the consequences.

    She may persist in reinvention of herself as blithely innocent, but she should find it within herself to release Dr. Linehan so that he can move on with his life once the appellate process is exhausted.

  8. Mrs. Cleatus Pomazal-Smith says:

    Off koss you are innocent, my dear! ML appellant attorneys need only explain away a few “bumps.” (1) A million dollar life insurance policy for fiance KL in which he chose to designate ML as sole beneficiary in event of his death was appropriate to gift him as a wedding present. (2) Email correspondence expressing love/marriage concurrently to each of three utter losers is accepted as normal, typical female behavior. (3) Gifts of cash, diamonds, furs, clothing, etc., were intended for ML’s wardrobe at university. (4) Hope letter from most important man in ML’s life, JC, to which ML responded, was not specifically to cause KL to want to confront ML while ML actually was in Lake Tahoe with fiance SH. (5) Desert Eagle gun purchased by JC and used as murder weapon in no way inveigles ML in KL’s murder apart from the three of you having direct close involvement in each other’s and KL’s lives during time of KL’s death. (6) KL was a “bother” JC shot, and not a rival. (7) KL was mentally unbalanced and not mentally overwrought because he realized he had been completely conned by ML. (8) Discovery of KL’s body within timeframe of Hope letter was pure coincidence. (9) JC’s conviction of KL’s murder had no connection to ML whatsoever, because KL was a pest JC shot for no apparent reason or motivation other than to eradicate an obsessive, irritating human being. This case is teeming with reasonable doubt!

    Excluding KL’s letter and ML working as a stripper will not virtually guarantee a finding of any innocence, because evidence above alone indicates ML’s unique, ongoing, intimate degree of involvement in lives of KL and JC in proximity to KL’s death; the inexplicably unanswered question of status of life insurance policy does not deny change in beneficiary form found in dead KL’s pocket; JC’s possession of gun identical in model to murder weapon was admitted to by JC; Hope letter is sole explanation luring KL to Hope where he was subsequently shot dead; gifts of jewelry, furs, cash, etc., show ML’s motivational preferences and disposition; ML’s unconscionable use of individuals for gifts and self-interested purposes demonstrates ML’s sociopathic coldness and disregard for other people’s lives; and fact that ML would actually put into effect a million dollar life insurance policy on a dupe’s life which would be of no benefit to KL in event of his death–remain seriously disturbing questions surrounding the death of KL.

    Without ML, KL would still be alive; ML also played a part in ruining JC’s life, which resulted in his untimely death; conning SH; and now usurping and controlling CL’s life by continuing to feign innocence of her crime. The fact that ML did not know how to BE or BEHAVE INNOCENTLY in front of the jury: “I felt uncomfortable looking at the jury . . .;” “if I smiled . . . if I cried, I was guilty” “. . . nothing I did was right” are crushing, revealing evidence of her guilt–and not just of scamming men out of material things. She is guilty of fundamentally conspiring with JC to kill KL, because JC would have never killed KL alone and without her influence. KL may have been in the way, but JC had no motivation to off him, because KL did not pose any rival threat to him.

    Judge’s sentence was harsh–25 to life would be more reasonable sentence.

  9. jenifer santoro says:

    Proof positive that many men will do ANYTHING to get some, and also that there are many women who will take advantage of it to break the law (or, in this case, commit murder)
    A hardened trailer trash woman of loose morals took this manipulation to a whole new level when she conned another man (a doctor no less), and thought she would get away with murder, but her chicken have come home to roost.

    The good doctor probably knows in his heart that she is guilty, but he now wants to make an exception because this ex-woman of loose morals is the mother of his child.

    Well, what about the victim?

    And, I think the jailhouse killing of the trigger puller should also be investigated, For all we know, this woman of loose morals may have influenced some jailbirds (perhaps with the lure of conjugal visits) to kill the trigger puller. The jailbirds may have done the killing in the hopes of getting some…

    Actually, it is good that there is going to be an appeal and another trial. Let us hope this woman of loose morals gets another few months of uncertainty, a scant hope that she may get out……and then, let us hope this woman of loose morals gets thrown back in jail again…

  10. Dr. Scott Smith says:

    Dear Dr. Linehan: We do not intend to be unkind, but YIKES! While Dr. Linehan stoically shrouds himself in the false nobility of loyalty to Mechele Kay Hughes through delusional denial, she has quixotically extended her skills from accomplice to murder to destroying his reputation and practice, to ruining his life as he knew it, and to becoming increasingly dependent on him for her present identity until she has sucked all meaningful life out of him.

    We are completely convinced that the appellate attorneys elimination of Kent Leppink’s letter, the irrelevant film, and Ms. Hughes’ stripper history from her new trial matters not when considering the remaining overwhelming critically incriminating items of circumstantial evidence, which are more than sufficient to reconvict Ms. Hughes of acting in concert with John Carlin to rid Ms. Hughes of an individual who had become seriously bothersome, irritating, and inconvenient to have around. The hostility she exhibited toward Mr. Leppink and his victimization as an oddball obsessive jerk in no way justifies the taking of another human be-ing’s life.

    How stupid was the decision to consent to the two-hour “48 Hours|Hard Evidence”/”48 Hours|Mystery” interview, which turned the great majority of the court of public opinion on its head against Ms. Hughes, based on a review of public comments posted which span several web sites. Only 2% of these shows feature people who are truly innocent, and only 1% result in a two-hour production.

    How stupid and transparent were Ms. Hughes rationales, poor logic and explanations, contradictions, and lies, and how abysmal were her acting skills—a grown woman lapsing into baby talk–in defending her position. She proved to be clearly out of her league when she chose to be the focus of a program that would subject her to judgment by the public at large. She is no longer deceiving merely three lonely, below-average, highly unattractive, loser males, but she is continuing to deceive Dr. Linehan, because truth is prohibited to her at all costs.

    How arrogantly stupid was Ms. Hughes in assuming the attitude, “The burden of proof was not on me . . . My job was to let the state present their evidence”—and present it did!—as though marrying a doctor and getting a master’s degree renders her incapable of committing this crime! So, her stripper past and all associations that attend to that lifestyle are to be excluded while her marriage to a doctor and all associations that at-tend to that lifestyle are to stand? Ms. Hughes had an extremely close call in connection with Mr. Leppink’s murder in 1996, and she was scared into behaving straight moving forward.

    “It hurts me so bad that someone would think I could do something to their child,” (vomit), when she has lied to Mr. Leppink and his parents about being engaged to him, falsely put him on a cruel emotional roller coaster, scammed him out of substantial sums of money and expensive gifts, taken a million dollar life insurance policy naming her as the beneficiary—all over the course of a year and a half—and accounting for becoming engaged to him by invoking the gay excuse! Discrimination against gays! We are supposed to believe that she assumed he was gay and that she presented herself as KL’s fiance out of the goodness of her heart, because being gay is a painful secret? The Leppink’s could have cared less if their son were gay, and they knew for a fact he was not. Please!

    Were those diamonds, jewelry, furs, clothing, etcetera, intended for use as her wardrobe at university?

    “Bad choices” does not absolve fraudulent behavior, controlling and using three men for selfish, greedy purposes, devaluation and abject disregard for the lives of other human beings, and sinking so low as to premeditate the elimination of Kent Leppink, who, by that time, had become a man she could no longer keep up any pretense of involvement in a serious relationship. John Carlin had no reason or motivation to kill Mr. Leppink on his own. He killed Mr. Leppink because Ms. Hughes wanted to be rid of him and wanted to collect on the insurance.

    Ms. Hughes severely overestimated her ability to set up an insurance policy and to subsequently feign naivete about its implications as motive.

    Whether you believe from the bottom of your heart and soul that Ms. Hughes is innocent is irrelevant. When she is reconvicted of her crime, will you still never give up? That is the hard, long, lonely road that you will ultimately be facing. Free Me, indeed! Free Me not! Ms. Hughes is an extremely offensive, stupid, arrogant, disdainful lying fake who must suffer the consequences of her adulthood behavior. Your life has already become notorious through no fault of your own. Once she is found guilty at second trial, it is time you cut her loose and work hard to get your and your daughter’s lives back to normal.

    Although it leaves a more mixed bag of conclusions as to her guilt than does “48 Hours|Hard Evidence”/”48 Hours|Mystery,” Oxygen channel’s “Snapped” program discloses additional evidence against Ms. Hughes. The press and the prosecution are always disingenuous, but no more so than Ms. Hughes.

    Before my wife became a doctor’s wife, she managed to pay for her undergraduate and graduate education through work-study, grants, scholarships, and student loans. Few women would consider stripping to pay for their college education. That is a red flag right there, because it is understood that strippers rely on conning their customers out of cash, gifts, and most of the income they receive. Ms. Hughes became heady over the amount of power she could exert over men in backwards Alaska, and she thought she was so convincing and so intelligent in plying her little act, she crossed the line and believed she could get away with disposing of another human being. Unfortunately for her, Mr. Leppink’s body was found in Hope within days of finding the Hope note (means), of Ms. Hughes informing police of existence of million dollar life insurance policy (motive), and within close proximate time of her unconscionable deception in three simultaneous relationships vis a vis email correspondence, which tyed Ms. Hughes to Mr. Leppink and Mr. Carlin (character).

  11. David0 says:

    Discrimination Against Gays Is at Heart of Mechele Hughes Defense

    What is so despicable, harmful, and revealing about Mechele Hughes is that as recently as her trial(!), she was continuing to prey upon the long-obsolete negative stereotype of gay people as justification for her core actions. She relies on the outmoded notion that being gay is a shameful condition that should remain secret from parents and friends. In her scheme to have John Carlin kill Kent Leppink, she would have you think she assumed the noble position of one who is generous enough in spirit to volunteer to pose as the fiance of a gay man to his parents so that they do not have to suffer the pain and anguish of having a gay son and so that the son can keep his sexual preference hidden. Ms. Hughes does this without even verifying with Mr. Leppink that he is in fact gay and that gayness is even an issue of conflict, i.e., “I think he was gay,” as though we are to believe that based on her presuming this to be the case, she would elect to step in and pretend to be his fiance.

    Similarly, she utilizes the negative stereotype of gays in her explanation to the police that her relationship with Mr. Leppink is “unique,” whom she claims, “likes guys,” where she thinks the unique nature of her relationship with Mr. Leppink allows her to be the innocent beneficiary of his life insurance policy. There is a reason Loyola University accepts two-thirds of all applicants, according to US News & World Report, because Ms. Hughes has proved to be dumb beyond belief.

  12. David0 says:

    So pleased free me not Hughes won appeal, had conviction overturned, is rescheduled for NEW trial, with the same prosecutors and judge slated to preside! And that her family and friends are having to appeal for more money to meet bail, the lack of which prevents Ms. Hughes from being released from prison before trial, forcing her to endure the uncertainty and finality of the next verdict, which is in God’s hands, and God considers the taking of an innocent person’s life quite seriously. Apparently, contributions on behalf of the court of public opinion in donations to Dr. and Mrs. Linehan’s legal bills and by buying Free Me t-shirts and other Free Me brick-a-brack are not exactly filling coffer sufficiently to spring Ms. Hughes. My. My. My.

  13. Bonnie says:

    Kudos to the writers on this page! Well-written; well-presented FACTS
    on the Michele Linehan case are greatly appreciated. How anyone can
    believe she is innocent is bewildering at best. Many people have stated
    that Michele’s ‘looks’ worked against her in the trial. Really? The writers
    on this page are mostly men, and they would hardly be consumed with
    jealousy over the fair Michelle Linehan’s good looks. Frankly, it was probably one of the few times her looks didn’t place her at an advantage, because it is blatantly obvious she was banking on that happening.
    Michele will be tried again, and she will be found guilty again. Please do not demean our intelligence by insisting we were swayed by her old life-style. We were convinced by the overwhelming evidence the prosecution presented on her. Reading her email exchanges between her fiancee’s is more then enough evidence to convict her alone.
    She is a lying, manipulating sociopath who is now using her poor sap husband with no regards for what it is doing to him, not to mention her daughter. Guilty!

  14. rob elliott says:

    i myself watch the whole story and i cant beleive she was covicted and the over kill of 99 years and how the jury excuse the holdout make it easier and mostly woman jury, the evidence is not there, i hope she has a new trlal and gets out and freedom, rob in fl

  15. diane says:

    Do any of you supporters think for one minute that Linehan would give a dam about you if you were incarcerated? I can tell you right now—she would not. Of course her family want her out. Sooooooooo do all of the families of inmates. There is nothing special about that. And all of those long drawn out letters to the judge mean nothing since the source is after all biased. Now they want you to give 2000 up front and 500 a month for a yr. to finance her appeal. Personally I wouldn’t give 2000 pennies for her fund. But if you cannot find a more worthy cause to donate to then live with your conscience.

  16. Goddessmountain says:

    “They” did not ask anyone for “2000 upfront” and “500 a month for a yr.” If you did not read the source yourself, then shame on you for repeating it as fact without checking first. If you did read it yourself, then go back to school and take a reading comprehension course. Either that or see a shrink because you have serious issues you are projecting into what you read and hear which is warping your perceptions.

    What you wrote is a gross misrepresentation of the discussion. Supporters were discussing how local defense attorneys, most of whom, if not all, believe the courts really screwed up charging and convicting her, could possibly join together to do pro-bono so that no one firm would have to take a $400-$500,000.00 loss. No one in the family was involved in the discussion, and supporters that were, especially those right there in Alaska, had every right to question how their best local attorneys might work together for justice. Multiple firms wanted her case but she couldn’t afford them and they couldn’t afford that much pro-bono, especially in the current economy.

    The discussion of specific amounts of money was merely one supporter throwing out ideas of how it might be possible to help the bankrupted family, since Ms. Linehan was still sitting in prison after her conviction was overturned because she did not have the funds for an attorney. It was merely an independent idea thrown into the mix, there was no request, and the discussion moved on. Ultimately, that same supporter donated $25,000.00 of his own money, another individual who lives in the community but does not know the Linehans donated property toward the rest of the bail, and another community member also not close to the family provided a third-party custodian so that Ms. Linehan could finally leave prison a full three months after her conviction was overturned.

    Statements such as yours are grossly misleading and dishonest. The people having the discussion and who actually helped a stranger are the good guys.

    As for those “long, drawn out letters to the judge,” such letters are Normal in criminal cases such as this one. Is Ms. Linehan supposed to be different from myriads of other accused defendants? Are her family members, supporters, and the legal system supposed to behave differently than other people in their situation? Judges are supposed to read such letters before sentencing. It is expected. Apparently this judge didn’t though, because just like you, he claimed everyone writing on her behalf were biased, but some of those letters were written by people who did not even know her, and one was written by a juror describing jury improprieties during the trial and jury deliberations. Speaking of all those people with such derision and lack of respect, dismissing them wrongfully as merely biased is something to be ashamed of, and it exposes your own irrational bias.

  17. Goddessmountain says:

    There are no “facts” in this article to support your highly subjective and angry conclusions, so it isn’t clear why you are so pleased with it as a source of evidence of some kind. Did you actually read it?

  18. Really? says:

    The Exact Same ugly, unfounded, ignorant, even unbalanced comments under multiple names, sometimes the same and sometimes different names, but the same few writers repeating themselves all over the Internet for four years now, and you call the far fewer posts by her supporters spam? Again, it is your own bias showing.

  19. Cantlvr says:

    The actual Vitals website does NOT rate Colin Linehan highly. He is given a rating of Moderate, based on TWO patients' input. Margarita should get her facts straight before engaging in any journalistic effort. Furthermore, Tulane Medical School is not ranked among the top medical schools by US News & World Report. Before Colin and Mechele's highly profitable cosmetic laser center got under way, Colin was working as a lowly family practitioner affiliated with a military medical center–Madigan Army Medical Center. You cannot get much lower than that.

  20. Cantlvr says:

    Goddessmountain? Really? YOU are the IDIOT whose bias as a supporter of MH is no more rational as is that of MH's detractors. Documentation of this fact? Your entire comment in which information you present as factual includes not a scintilla of substantiation–much less citation of any valid sources to support what are strictly your personal opinions and personal views. You are so hypocritical, you crack me oop! Talk about reading comprehension. YIKES!

  21. Cantlvr says:

    Dear Rob,

    YOU are quite possibly the most illiterate human being whose English I have ever read. Is English your second language? If so, you did quite well.

  22. Cantlvr says:

    EXTREMELY insightful and highlighting several important points! I love your casual, stream of consciousness style of writing, which is effortless and a pleasurable ease to read. I agree with everything you said. 48 Hours recently televised a one-hour-long update to “Love and Death in Alaska”–probably available for viewing online. It contains an interesting, more-realistic-than-the-positive-rubbish-that-is-being-spewed-and-spun-forth-from-family-and-supporters perspective offered by MH concerning her view of upcoming trial.

  23. Cantlvr says:

    Goddessmountain! Goddessmountain! Goddessmountain! Good grief! Calm down. Pull yourself together. You obviously become quite overwrought, if not a bit nuts, by reading any comments written by individuals who are convinced of MH's guilt. Now, let us consider your comment, below, in view of the sampling of negative comments posted on this site:
    “The Exact Same ugly, unfounded, ignorant, even unbalanced comments under multiple names, sometimes the same and sometimes different names, but the same few writers repeating themselves all over the Internet for four years now, and you call the far fewer posts by her supporters spam? Again, it is your own bias showing.”

    On what possible basis are you able to maintain that these comments are the (1) exact same; (2) ugly; (3) unfounded; (4) ignorant; (5) even unbalanced; (6) written under multiple names; (7) sometimes the same and sometimes different names; (8) but the same few writers repeating themselves all over the Internet for four years now; (9) you call the far fewer posts by her supporters spam; and (10) again, it is your own bias showing?????

    (1) Of sixteen posts, none are identical. (2) Of sixteen posts, your comment is one of the ugliest. (3) Most of the negative posts among the sixteen total cite reasons to substantiate their information and views. (4) None of the negative comments posted are any more or any less ignorant than is your comment. You demonstrate no exceptional knowledge or intelligence or any reason that negative comments are necessarily ignorant while your pro-MH comments are not ignorant. (5) Of all comments posted, yours is the most unbalanced. Its contents are wild with made-up accusations and expose an irrational level of anger over a topic of human interest. (6) Multiple names is correct. (7) No evidence of “sometimes the same and sometimes different names” with the exception of your and Cantlvr's multiple postings. (8) Absolutely no basis in fact for which there is any evidence in existence to make such a wild accusation. (9) Jane is not calling the far fewer posts by her supporters spam–read the comment correctly. (10) a meaningless non sequitur. Any comment that is negative is automatically biased, and only pro-MH comments are objective.

    It is quite bizarre that you are wholly incapable of entertaining the reality of there being an overwhelming number of people nationwide who have seriously considered the critical facts of this case and have ultimately concluded that MH is guilty. My. My. My.

  24. Anonymous says:

    What does any of that have to do with the criminal case? Nothing.

  25. Anonymous says:

    Are you an adult? Because this reads like it is coming from a 14-year-old, if that. BTW, thinking adults don’t believe they are watching facts on TV shows like 48 Hours. Thinking adults know they are watching heavily edited tabloid TV for entertainment. That’s a far cry from evidence that belongs in a courtroom and from evidence that was actually presented.

  26. Anonymous says:

    Hey moron, it is obvious goddessmountain read the court files because I did and what goddessmountain described is right there for anyone to read. That is anyone who actually makes that much effort. It’s obvious most of the lot posting in here didn’t do any responsible research before jumping to conclusions and then sharing them. You would be great on a witch burning committee.

  27. Anonymous says:

    “two key “incriminating” factors that a perceptive and skilled criminal psychologist would detect as evidence of guilt. ”

    Hilarious! Real forensic psychologists can tell you aren’t one.

    Who Are you people?


  28. Anonymous says:

    Maybe goddess knows it is spam, like your post is, because like me, goddess traced a lot of them back to the same house in CA? Hmmmm? Or maybe godess can just tell by the writing. Either way, I know because I traced a lot of them back to the same house in CA. Interesting, heh?

  29. Anonymous says:

    What does it have to do with the criminal case? Nothing.

  30. Anonymous says:

    “EXTREMELY insightful”

    LOL!! You are so, sad. If you weren’t such a sick puppy, you’d be really funny!

  31. Anonymous says:

    Facts? What facts?

    Someone needs to go back to school. Or is this what our public education system is producing? If so, never mind school, but please, do the world a favor and buy a dictionary. Then use it.

  32. Anonymous says:

    You’ve created a really nice collection. Some of these sites really stand out, and are great additions to this list.

  33. Bill says:

    Sorry for the husband, she’s a manipulator of men, obviously. Made a serious mistake in her younger days that has ruined her entire life, not to mention all who was involved with her, and that is many. She is not worth all the suffering she has caused and continues to cause. I’m a firm believer in karma, she will get her due, hopefully soon!