[QUOTE who="cheyenne"]1. Joe had no motive.[/QUOTE] As stated by AK Royal Oak there was motive. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]7. Joes dying declaration, evidence admissible in court, is that Joe said he had nothing to do with the murders in his suicide note. How could a Catholic on his deathbed immediately before his death confess his sins and ask forgiveness of being a liar, a cheat, and a fraud, but not confess to the sin of murder? Why even confess at all go to all the trouble of writing 2 suicide notes if you do not mention the big sin ? Joe did not leave out confessing of murder to appease his mother - his mother had already heard from everybody in the world that Joe committed murder.[/QUOTE] Are you suggesting no Catholics could possibly be criminals? [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]9. Joe would not have tried to kill 6 people at once with 2 very under powered squirrel guns at 9:00pm while they all were awake and alert and able to defend themselves or to run away - Joe would have waited just another 2 hours for them to all be trapped, far away from the doors, asleep, defenseless, and unable to defend themselves or to run away. Joe had no reason to kill them at 9:00pm instead of 11:00pm[/QUOTE] How do you know Joe so well as to suggest his actions? Whomever killed the family did it with the guns used, and at the time determined by investigators. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]13. If Joe had hired somebody else to be RoEBErt then that person would have testified against Joe already[/QUOTE] Not true, there was not court case to testify at. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]17. The brutal murders of Richard, Shirley, Susan, and the boys is out of character for Joe's entire life history, and Joe never before nor since showed any trait that would allow Joe to do such a thing[/QUOTE] I would think that suicide would be a trait of someone who could be capable of murder. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]19. The things that were done by the murderer after the killing, the dragging of bodies, posing of bodies, writing of notes, placing blankets, assaulting Shirley, covering up the bullet holes, wiping off and cleaning up all evidence, etc. etc. all took lots of time, it was all done deliberately, methodically, by somebody who was not in a hurry. If Joe had been the killer, Joe would have been in a hurry to get out of that place so he could drive 300 miles home, stop for gasoline, wash off all the blood on himself and off of his clothes, go hide both of the murder weapons and dispose of the gloves and the Totes boots, go home and pack for his trip, get some sleep before he left for Indianapolis the very next morning.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't any killer be in the same hurry as Joe? why would his actions be different? [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]25. Joe and Lora willingly, eagerly, completely, freely gave absolutely huge amounts of testimony and cooperation to the police without an attorney being present, with and without lie detectors and tape recorders. Why would they do that if Joe was guilty? [/QUOTE] Lora Lee thought her husband was innocent, and Joe's narcissistic personality made him feel invincible. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]27. If Joe had been the murderer and knew that the Robisons were dead Joe would never have told Shirley's family or the Smiths such an obvious lie that he personally talked with the Robisons 3 weeks after they died, knowing full well that a statement of such could be proved to be impossible. The real murderer would NOT say such a thing,the real murderer is the only person who would never say such a thing because only the murderer would know that eventually everyone would know it was a lie .[/QUOTE] So why did he tell people he was in contact with the family and they were doing fine? Sounds like someone buying time to me... [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]29. Why didn't RoEBErt call up Richard's secretary at the Robison business office the very next day to ask why Richard did not answer the door when RoEBErt came to the cabin in Good Hart on June 25?[/QUOTE]Roebert did not exist. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]33. how could Joe have been at the Robison cabin and not leave a trace of evidence not a single fingerprint, not a hair, not a fiber, not a cigarette butt, not a single partial print on any of the empty bullet casings, nothing. How could Joe be so careful and well planned that he wiped off all of his fingerprints off of the bullets, instead of just picking up the spent casings? [/QUOTE]The initial investigation was botched. Richard Smith was appalled by the foot traffic and local hanging around the murder scene when he showed up. The most damning example of this was the hammer handle wiped clean for a photo. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]37. Joe would not have done the exceedingly rare murder traits of posing of the bodies, would not have placed blankets and rugs over the bodies, would not have piled the bodies on top of each other, would not have stabbed Shirley's menstrual pad, [/QUOTE] Once again, how do you know Joe well enough to determine this? [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]38. If Joe wanted Richard to be dead Joe would have quietly killed Richard in Detroit making it look like a random common every-day mugging not worth the attention of a single cop nor a single line of newspaper print.[/QUOTE] Very true, but it all can to a head when Richard found out about the embezzlement on the morning of the 25th, and confronted Joe over the phone about it. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]39. If Joe was guilty Joe would have committed suicide back in January 1970 when the real heat was on him by the police, prosecutors, and newspapers[/QUOTE] Once again, how do you know this? [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]42. Joe's last dying confession immediately before he died and was about to appear in Heaven in front of Jesus and God, Joe asked forgiveness for lying, cheating, stealing, but JOe plainly declared both to the world and to God that he had nothing to do with the Robison murders[/QUOTE]So no one has ever gone to their grave with a secret, or at least a Catholic? [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]43. If Joe had called Shirley at home pretending to be RoEBErt, if Joe had called the airport pretending to be RoEBErt, if Joe had called Richard at the cabin pretending to be RoEBErt, the the AT&T phone records would have revealed such.[/QUOTE] Couldn't agree more about the phone records. I have always thought the records/logs were not followed up enough. I think Mardi told me that in 1968 records were not required to be kept very long, and that the investigators simply made notes from the records that they did find, and not actually copy anything. No records from a phone company for 1968 exist today unless someone made a copy back then. [QUOTE who="cheyenne"]46. Richard met with RoEBErt in California.[/QUOTE] There is no proof he actually me someone named Roebert in CA.