Friday, 10 April 2015

Guy Heinze Jr - Did he Really Kill his Entire Family?


Guy Heinze Jr


I first became aware of the Guy Heinze Jr case when I watched Life and Death Row, the documentary made by BBC UK. Incidentally, it was this programme - albeit a different episode - that first brought my attention to the Robert Pruett case. The thing that struck me about the Heinze Jr case, apart from the incredible violence of the case, was the fact a single man had been convicted of the murders of eight people. These people were various members of his family, including his own father, and had all been in the family trailer at the time of the killings. Is it really possible for a lone man to overpower and murder eight people, without anyone hearing or seeing anything?  

On August 29th 2009, a frantic 911 call was made to dispatchers in Glynn County, Georgia. Margaret Orlinski, a neighbor of Heinze and his family, informed them that her neighbour was 'freaking out' and shouting his family were all dead. After being brought to the phone, an hysterical Heinze Jr confirmed that ' my entire family are dead' before dropping the phone and going back to the trailer. Orlinski added that ten people lived in the trailer and Guy Heinze Jr had apparently returned from a night out to the gruesome scene. When officers arrived at the family's trailer they found the dead bodies of six people; Guy Heinze Sr, Rusty Toler Sr, Brenda Falagan, Chrissy Toler, Russell D Toler, Michelle Toler and her boyfriend, Joseph L West. Two survivors, one with life threatening injuries, a young adult with downs syndrome identified as Michael Toler and the small son of Chrissy Toler Byron Jimmerson were removed from the trailer and rushed to hospital. Sadly, 19-year old Michael Toler died from his injuries the day after the murders. Byron would go on to make a full recovery and is now being raised by family.  


The crime scene was described by many of the police officers in attendance as the worse they had ever seen. Although Guy Heinze Jr appeared to be devastated by the loss of his family, he was a person of interest from the beginning. A press conference two days after the murders confirmed Heinze Jr was not an official suspect but nor had they ruled out his involvement. Law enforcement did confirm they believed only one person was responsible for the murders. Guy Heinze Jr was arrested on suspicion of murder and other charges on September 4th 2009. 


The trial of Guy Heinze Jr began in October 2012, despite prosecutors stating they would be seeking the death penalty Heinze Jr pleaded 'not guilty' to all eight counts of murder. Prosecutors believe that Heinze Jr returned to the family trailer early on the morning of the murders high after a night of smoking crack cocaine. Knowing his uncle, Russell Toler Sr, had a strong painkiller prescription he set about looking for the tablets. When he was confronted by Toler Sr prosecutors said Heinze Jr completely 'lost it' resulting in Toler and the other seven residents of the trailer being savagely bludgeoned. Autopsy results shared during the trial revealed the victims received over 220 injuries between them and each died of brain and head injuries. Although the murder weapon was never actually found, investigators believe the victims were beaten with the butt of a shotgun. Guy Heinze Jr's defence team implored the jury to consider the chances of a single man being able to contain and beat eight people in a small trailer with not one of the victims escaping. The defence also believed the police had concentrated on Heinze Jr being the perpetrator from the very beginning and this gave them tunnel vision with regard to any other possible suspects. 


While much of the Heinze Jr case was circumstantial, this did not stop the jury from finding him guilty of eight counts of malice murder. Thanks to a juror being removed during deliberations and replaced, the defence team made a deal that removed the death penalty from the table. Guy Heinze Jr was sentenced to life without parole. 


Is it possible for a single man to beat eight people to death in a small trailer without anyone raising the alarm or, from the evidence found, even fighting back? Both Heinze Jr's neighbour and the police who arrived on the scene noted he was not covered in blood or injured in any way. Beating eight people to death with the butt of a shotgun is going to leave the killer drenched in blood, surely? It is also important to note that there were relatively fit males among the victims, certainly capable of at least injuring an attacker if not warding them off together. Yet apparently, on that night in 2009, Guy Heinze Jr brutally beat eight members of his family to death, without any of them even waking up, screaming or calling for help. He then walked away from the crime scene with minimal blood on his hands, which Heinze Jr explained was from when he found the bodies. Do you think the right person is in prison? or is Guy Heinze Jr innocent of the crimes for which he was convicted?





                                          The Guy Heinze Jr 911 Call



95 comments:

  1. I think there were a few more thing the jury considered aside from a bloody pair of boxer shorts which has been described as the "smoking gun". There was the lie about the shotgun and to whom it belonged. Heinze statement was that he had bought the shotgun but in fact the shotgun belonged to one of the victims. He couldn't account for his whereabouts, while the "park" story seems like an alibi, hard to believe none of the campers saw him there. There was more, but these things add up to a jury.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He never said he bought the gun. He said that.it was stolen. Regardless the "evidence" that the jury heard left doubt all over the place. The fact is that the police dept. didn't do a, in anyway, a professinal job investigating the crime scene. I flat out believed the jury would find him innocent. Horrible part of our society!

      Delete
    2. He did in fact say he bought the gun, and that he thought the gun was stolen. That interview was conducted an hour after his 911 call and was responsible for his initial arrest for tampering with evidence. He was distraught during that interview and I for one am not surprised he made errors during the interview. He'd just found 7 members of his family brutally murdered and one had been taken to hospital with life threatening injuries. Not to mention the younger child who was also in hospital. He was worried about those in hospital and in shock from what he had just found.myou can hear the desperation and emotion in his voice on his 911 call. Plus the whole thing about the police assuming they had been shot whereas Guy stated they had been beaten is explained by the fact that Guy searched for signs of life while the police would not have wanted to disturb the crime scene.

      Delete
    3. guy said there was no one in the park that night,if he drove in there he would of drove straight past where campers were set up on the left hand side you could not miss them,victims blood on his boxer shorts that were under his other shorts,cannot be explained,guilty as charged in my mind.

      Delete
    4. guy said there was no one in the park that night,if he drove in there he would of drove straight past where campers were set up on the left hand side you could not miss them,victims blood on his boxer shorts that were under his other shorts,cannot be explained,guilty as charged in my mind.

      Delete
    5. I am more confused as I think about this case in court they showed one victim they said had bloody hand prints on his ankles if so who's handprints are they? Did they match guy? There isn't no way 8 people are beat to death in a small mobile home so close to other mobile homes an no one hears?? The police didn't try to look at anyone even to see if he had help since they think he did it an it should have been a mistrail since the jury couldn't figure it out this is so confusseing. He never took the stand or did an interview with the public an that could've helped I think

      Delete
    6. I believe he did it. Folks on crack or meth have committed similar crimes. Perhaps one of the victims was an accomplice. Wanted his father's settlement money. Some alibi "I was smoking crack".

      Delete
    7. I have high doubts he could do such a crime himself and to say he did it for his father's money is ridiculous none of us know for sure what happened that night but for one man to kill his whole family without any of them waking is a very big doubt in my mind

      Delete
    8. I don't believe he killed his family for his dad's money anyone of us could find ourselves in a situation like I don't believe for a second he killed all those people by himself

      Delete
  2. From the transcripts I have read, which is by no means all of them and also watching an interview with three members of the jury, it would seem blood spots on Heinze Jr's boxer shorts was the most compelling piece of evidence. He did have some blood on his hands, due to him checking for life (Heinze's explanation) is it not possible this blood transferred to his boxers/gym shorts when he pulled down his trousers to either be examined or go to the toilet. The shotgun, whoever 'owned' it was stolen and Heinze stated he was worried he would be in trouble for having a stolen weapon. Illogical given your family are laying dead in a trailer, with you as the only suspect but it could be the rational actions of an innocent man. As for nobody seeing him on the trailer park, nobody heard eight people being bludgeoned to death either! I am not convinced of Heinze Jr's guilt...or innocence really. I do believe he had an accomplice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. he shouldve been found not guilty even if you believe as a juror that defendant is guilty but the state didnt prove its case you have to find them not guilty thats the law.....the fact that the police didnt do their job and not process evidence that couldve incrimitnated him or proved is innocence is enough to leave doubt .... as a defendant he has a right to the pressumption of innocence and has to be proven guitly but its like the jury presumed him guilty and wanted him to prove his innocence the burden is on the state to prove guilt the defense doesnt have to prove anything....mark my words his case will be overturned

      Delete
    2. If there was insufficient evidence to convict, his attys would have filed a motion before he was sentenced on those grounds. They did not. But hey, what do they know? A bunch of non lawyers who are privy to little of the evidence beyond what was fed to them by an antiDP program know so much more. LOL

      Delete
  3. I did a cursory look at his case but if you like I can dive in. I believe the boxer shorts blood that Heinze states was transferred when he sad on the bed is not really convincing since it was on the front and seems more likely he thought changing his outer shorts was enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please investigate and your jaw will drop!

      Delete
    2. People have been found not guilty with more than this. I certainly don't know the truth, that's between whoever did this and God. What I know forensically speaking is he was loaded not a mastermind killer so he would be drenched in evidence. He probably wouldn't have even thought to get rid of a murder weapon. Also if I had been up all night, came home to find this had happened to my family I can guarantee you my mind would be all over the place and thinking of whether people were next door or not or who bought what I could very easily mess up especially when being asked 20 different times in 40 different ways. Just saying.

      Delete
    3. I just watched this on fox.. i cant believe he was found guilty. Impossible. . Is there a retrial?

      Delete
    4. I write him he says he just now got his trial transcripts so hopefully he can get his appeal started its so confusing I don't understand how no one heard this in a trailer park come on 8 people 4 fit males in the house I dunno

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you have the time to dive in, I would certainly like to know what you think. I know a forensic analysis expert has gone over the crime scene photos and given the conclusion that, due to blood spatter and the direction of some of the victims' wounds, this attack was carried out by more than one, more than two people. The police have also admitted crucial DNA evidence was 'missed' or not collected. For instance, blood droplets from one of the victims was found in a sink, away from where the body was found. Despite brutally battering 8 people, and if you have seen the crime scene photos you will know just how bloody it was, Guy Heinze Jr had not one injury to himself. In fact, all he had was a small blood droplet on the gym shorts he was wearing like boxers. If you see the pictures of what Guy was wearing, I think those shorts were the third layer of clothing he was wearing. I am not saying he was innocent, just that, on the face of it, a young man returning to the family trailer and finding 8 people dead/dying is much more believable then one lone individual committing the act without taking more of such a bloody crime away with him. How would he of subdued them? Ok, there was two women and younger persons but there were also three grown men....Joseph Adams, the boyfriend, was a huge man and definitely not someone I would be against in a fight. But, looks are deceiving. The whole case just confuses me.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well I finally got a view of the crime scene photos and WOW. If anyone thought the crime scene of Arizona v Arias was a mess, this crime scene was a complete horror. Clearly the person or persons who committed this crime were drenched in blood spatter and brain material. I haven't read all the transcripts yet, (the case is not at all voluminous but I am in the middle of a review of a case in Alabama).
    So far, it appears there was no evidence collected from the bathroom, or if there was it is not disclosed. THAT would be so important as it would most certainly be necessary for the killer or killers to "wash up" if not outright shower. I have no opinion yet as to this conviction, but will look upon it as soon as I have a few days to comb the transcripts and pretrial motions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for taking the time to look into this case Admin. The crime scene was indeed 'bloody' - which is why the fact that Heinze Jr had only a small amount of blood on his fingers and his boxer shorts makes me think he didn't do it. I will hunt for the documentary I saw with the blood spatter expert who mentioned the blood in the sink. However, if memory serves correct the blood there was a couple of droplets - not indicative of a clean up by the killer. I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts.

      Delete
    2. Just my opinion:
      1) His park alibi - I do not understand why the defense did not rebuttal "the trailer owner" the one at the only entrance. He nor his wife could have possibly seen everything that day. I sometimes have to pee, eat sleep, those take me away from watching the window or sitting on my porch. I also understand that the man had a good knowledge of the fellow campers in the area....like him though were those campers also local lot purveyors or were they actually tent/camp sites and how did he know exactly where they were staying, something I would have went into further being the defense. Logically in this same situation those campers would have also been preoccupied and probably hidden, I don't know the size of the park or the land survey to which the road and campsites sit but I am assuming the place is at least a few miles wide and deep allowing for plenty of non-run ins. GHJ was also smoking crack and pot. If I did either and was doing it in the woods I would make sure no one was around. However when GHJ answered if anyone was around he didn't remark that he didn't remember because of the drugs he remarked that he didn't see anyone which well if there was only one road and the witnesses trailer was in plain view how did he miss it, or not remember avoiding it, that stuck out to me. Even if the resident didn't see him GHJ in most cases would’ve remembered seeing the entrance trailer? As a defense why did they not pursue other residence in the trailer park with leads of seeing GHJ in the park leading up to the incident or during the incident. Also during the entire case there were no other suspects or any mentions of any suspicious people/persons in the lot, or screams?
      2) Blood on the shorts - It is safe to assume as everyone has done that this crime left a lot of blood. Another point made very clear was that the police doing the initial investigation overlooked several key points of evidence. However as skeptics we tend to look for the reasons that this could have been someone else when in fact those same reasons, the police not doing a thorough job, could have led them to overlook the articles of clothing that may have been the smoking gun needed to convict not only GHJ but anyone else that could have accompanied him. The spot on the shorts though should bring a lot more questions than just how did it get there. One question the amount of blood on the shorts was miniscule. If GHJ was wearing multiple layers of clothing how does blood find its way inside multiple layers and leave a stain mid thigh? A better question blood residue from three individuals was found in that one small spot? If a frantic person is checking for life on multiple people it is understandable that multiple individuals would leave blood on said person…..kneeling shorts could turn up exposing a person’s clothing underneath…especially baggy clothing. Also for being as bloody of a scene as it was and GHJ checking everyone as he said I would of expected more blood on his clothing when police initially arrived. I wish the defense would have brought that view on the shorts in.

      Delete
    3. As for one man killing 8 people. I would’ve also liked to know the exact breakdown of the individuals and how they were sectioned off. It was stated 4 2 and 2. As a prosecutor I would have jumped at this as zoning out the victims into more manageable situations. Another thing that was not brought up was the toxicity levels of each of the victims. In most cases this would lead to null findings do to time but a test still would have cleared a few more things up, such as the ability to subdue someone that is inebriated?
      My overall thought is that he did do this not because he lied about the shotgun not because of the 911 call and him stating they were beaten but because of the interrogation by police. Many of the answers he gave including the alibi information simply did not add up and as a prosecutor I would have introduced the shorts but only after I thoroughly dissected the interrogation and the answers he gave – so the park information x one million. However I still don’t believe there was enough information to find him guilty. I wanted a hung jury I don’t care about preface or corrections made by either side I think we would have found that a hung jury would have led to a lot more evidence collecting and a lot more witnesses. In my mind I believe that is why witness 152 was thrown out not only because he/she was irrational towards the other jurors but because they thought the same thing that there was not enough evidence no matter shorts, shotgun or 911 call that could find this man guilty. I think the defense made a terrible move taking the deal of GHJ life over winning the trial, in reference to eliminating witness 152 and eliminating the Death penalty, why throw that in as a bargaining chip if witness 152 was not for an acquittal? Sorry my analytical mind sometimes runs away with things but I would love to hear what you think about this last point.

      Delete
    4. The exterior of the trailer, quite simply, was not searched adequetely. Nun chucks were found in some tires at the side of the home, nun chucks that a consultant for the defence said would explain some of the strange injuries found on the victims. These same injuries were said to be from cockroaches feeding on the bodies, according to the prosecution. The defence's consultant also testified that there was evidence that one of the victims, Brenda Flanagan, had been straddled by an individual to hold her down while a second person beat her. However, the prosecution said there wasn't enough blood on the duvet covering Flanagan to make this plausable. Could the duvet not of been thrown over her AFTER the beating. There are SO many unanswered questions, I too am at a loss at why the defence would make a deal when there were so many unanswered questions. The only thing I can think - and please do not think I am saying this is right ...at all, it is just a possible explanation. This happened in Georgia, Heinze was a poor Southern drug addicted no hoper and therefore a prime candidate, for the good ol eye-for-eye Southern justice system, to be responsible for the murder. The ifs, buts, and maybes didn't matter, Heinze was at the scene, with a rifle, coming down from a drug binge - case closed. I genuinely believe the defence were worried for his life, a conviction, no matter how possibly unsound the evidence, would of led to the death penalty. Look at the juror who was removed? in what sort of society is it right for a person to be removed from a jury because he questioned the perp's guilt. Why was he removed ?....because he was questioning law enforcement and risking the chance that this incredibly messy crime would go unsolved. The town would have no closure. And so I believe a deal was made because it was the best to hope for, the only way they could keep Heinze alive. Is he guilty? You know....the more I read....the more I actually think he isn't. At the very least, he didn't do it alone. But I am starting to believe he returned home after spending all night binging on drugs - he confessed this imediately - and walked in on his entire family....dead.

      Delete
    5. No forensics were performed inside either. . This police dept. and the DA should be ashamed!

      Delete
  7. Just to add, toxicology reports on all 8 victims were clear barring a small trace of a sleeping aid in one.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Whether he did it or not is not really the case here. In order to find him guilty of murder there has to be NO doubt. The blood on the shorts could have been from anytime. The trailer is a mess. It's gross and crowded, plus how many times do some guys change their underwear. So that right there would be doubt in my mind. No scratches or blood all over him. One guy killing eight men in a TINY place I don think is possible. Another doubt. This is why I don't think I would ever have a trial by jury. If I ever had to have a trial. Whatever happened to the youngest kid? No one questioned him? Sad to do but sometimes necessary. Just my 2 sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From what I understood, the sole survivor was only three and had brain injuries that later healed.

      Delete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have just watched the program about the murder of the 8 family by GHJ here in South Africa I am sorry but I do not think this man could have done this. I live by a camping site in a area that has high drug use and I can tell you that when you are doing drugs you always manage to snick into places just to smoke there is no such thing as only one entrance to a camping site there is always one way that locals know how to get into a park unseen. I have done it myself just to get away from the crowds at home and I was gone for over 8 hours. They should reinvestigate this whole case! It is really sad!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too questioned the one road theory. There are multiple routes into any area if you are local and not sticking to main roads. And as you rightly said he was going to the park to do something illegal, he is not going to march through the main entrance and set himself up where people are camping to smoke crack and marijuana knowing the police will be called. This wouldn't have been his first trip to the park, though I am not a drug user myself I grew up in an area of South London in England where drug use was rife and I know that all junkies have their preferred, secluded using sites. Referring back to anything he said in that first interview, he was distraught, shocked, confused and probably still high to a degree. That interrogation (It wasn't an interview) should never have happened when it did, and he should have had a lawyer present from the very beginning. This is exactly why I tell my children never to talk to the police without a lawyer (solicitor in the uk), as if you listen to both the Miranda warning in the US and the list of rights detailed in the UK, in both cases they specify that anything you say will be used AGAINST you in court.

      Delete
  11. I agree with Mariza and others. How this man could have been convicted by a jury is beyond me. The jurors must have been misled by prejudice and the withholding/botching of evidence. There is no physical evidence whatsoever against GHJ (as for the shorts, a forensic expert stated that the blood on them was clearly smeared from GHJ's contact with the scene, probably while searching for life, and not spattered as it would have been had he been the murderer or one of them). No blood on his shirt! It is totally impossible for him to have carried out this act, alone or otherwise. The only evidence against him is circumstantial. The removal of the shotgun, the 911 call and his inconsistent accounts of his whereabouts prove nothing (the 911 call suggests to me that GHJ was telling the truth). The police clearly ignored vital evidence, presumably in an attempt to get a quick conviction of a vulnerable person and clear up the case.
    This of course begs the question of who was involved, and why. Did the family have enemies? Did someone want them out of that trailer park?
    Someone knows the truth and that aspect has clearly not been investigated.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm not sure why this case was even put to court. Where is all the evidence? Is just one question of many that go unanswered in this interesting case. Evidence is what makes a case without evidence there is no case. A single blob/smudge of blood on a pair of gym shorts is what links you to the killing of 8 people. Really?
    I've just watched the documentary life and death row that's all I've seen and I feel sorry for GHJ just on what I watched I really am finding it hard to even contemplate how 12 jurors find GHJ guilty.
    Yes OK the trial lasted 2wks and I only saw 1hr of the case but, I have questions.
    Where there ANY fingerprints taken from the scene? OK the trailor is a complete mess and a lot of people have lived there but that's evidence missed. There were latent prints seen on the bodies made from blood where these matched forensically to GHJ?
    Everything within that trailor should have been taken and forensics tested it for fibres, hair, Sylvia, blood. Why was this not done yet more solid evidence lost?
    One person committing this crime in my eyes is very unlickly. The size of some of these guys, the small space within the trailor. How one can kill so many without 1 person getting out, shouting for help, screaming, attacking back or raising some alarm is strange. I personally don't know what each person was actively doing at the time the slayings started it's hard to understand how complete annorchy didn't break out in that trailor. Things would have been flying around smashing and breaking. No injuries on GHJ and no one heard or saw anything.
    No weapon was ever recovered?? Evidence lost.
    No DNA found at scene?
    The amount of injuries inflicted took 2 days to read out in court. Hundreds of blunt force trauma injuries over the whole family. GHJ must be some strong and determined person to do such damaged to so many people without someone retaliating you would have thought.
    The holding of the pillow over someone's head, whilst holding their forearm down whilst smashing the skull seems almost impossible by one person to me at least 4 people I think we're involved maybe as many as 6 people.

    This case is intriguing to me. I would love to of been in the court to witness the case. Going on lack of physical evidence, forensic evidence and not having all the FACTS I hope one day GHJ does get perole as he was unfairly tried I think. I can't say if he was guilty or not its not about that. GHJ should never have been accused without the solid evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I have now watched this documentary for the second time and feel both angry and frustrated.It seems the majority of viewers of this documentary fall on the side of innoce and I include myself. Guilt and innoce can't be judged from the armchairs of our home. We all have an opinion but we did not sit through two weeks of gruelling testimony from which one can make a truely informed decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree no evidence it makes me more confused the more I think of it he was honest about doing drugs an the cops took advantage of that plus he was poor an they thought noones going to care same thing happen to damion Wayne echols of west Memphis Arkansas in 1993 no evidence either he sat on death row 18 years til finally in 2011 he was released johnny depp,Eddie veder an many others stood up an fault for him I hope guy gets the help he needs the police knew damn well one man couldn't do this crime how u live with yourself everyday knowing u did someone dirty I don't know if its being lazy or just dumb but the sheriff came off like he didn't care about these people what so ever he just wanted it done wanted a pat on the back

      Delete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. How can the guy kill all those people without one getting away, also the size of the boyfriend

    ReplyDelete
  16. The one thing I found compelling and made me feel that he was involved on this to some extent was the ten seconds worth of interview footage when he was describing where he was- his hand gestures ceased and eventually were hidden under his sweater, his head shook no as he have his whereabouts- all common signs of a lie. I'm unsure as to what capacity he was involved, but he certainly knew more than he was letting on. The shoddy police work and collection of evidence in this instance means it is doubtful we will ever know the truth, so many questions remain unanswered. The females recieving more blows for example than the father who's injuries were more extensive however- does this indicate different parties committing the acts, or Heinze Jr's relationships and feelings towards the victims? Whatever the case if he did do it, it is doubtful he would have managed to do it alone, and the police should have looked further into family history, Heinze Jr's social circles, and carried out a far more thorough and detailed forensic analysis of the trailer and surrounding evidence- even a search for drug paraphernalia in the park Heinze said he had been in could have provided something. Lazy police work.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I have watch this documentary and read several items on the Internet and truely believe the wrong person is behind bars.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure if HE did it alone. But do feel he is responsible in some way.

      Delete
  18. I have known guy and this whole family all my life and when 8 first found out about this, I didn't even think guy could do this but after hearing the evidence and knowing guy, I do think he is capable! He was a very misbehaved child and teen! He was smoking and drinking at 7 yrs old. Very wild and into everything and very cold and mean to his father. This whole family had mental issues and disabilities. Brenda was paralyzed on half of her body so it would've been easy to smother her with one arm. Michael was verbal but could only make noises not really speak. Everyone was on some type of narcotic or adhd meds so I find it hard to believe that only one person had a small amount of sleeping aid in their system. Guy was a strong man and he flipped out often so I can see him going into an uncontrollable rage especially being high on Crack have u seen footage of as many as 12 officers having to hold down one man because he was on drugs and couldn't be restrained? Do I believe he had an accomplice? I do but do I believe he could be did this himself? Indeed!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. He must not have been too much of a trouble maker cause he had never been in trouble with the law. Also toxicology reports don't lie. Crack does not cause people to be outraged and beat to death several people of that we're the case it would be happening all the time cause there are several crack addicts out here. As far as mental issues Guy was evaluated by the courts and has none. He may be a little hot headed but not a mass murderer. I to know GHJ and would never ever believe he could do something like this it's just not his character.

      Delete
    3. nicole edwards you may have known guy by you havent seen and know much about his life when this happen ONE PERSON can't do that much to any person without getting somekind of mark on them

      Delete
  19. I can't honestly understand how this crime could be committed by a single individual. To subdue that many people and even keep up the stamina to repeatedly administer as many blows to the victims. Whether or not GHJ was one of the perpetrators I honestly believe this is the work of more than one individual.

    Also, I've been in many trailers/caravans and they aren't exactly sound proof. The walls are thin and sound easily carries outside. I've been in trailers where I could hear someone walking around in the trailer next door very clearly! Even if the perpetrator(s) managed to keep the victims quiet I believe such brutal and vicious blows would be audible. Dependant on the time of day this incident occured I highly doubt that someone didn't hear something suspicious?

    I feel the crime scene was poorly processed and relevant evidence was overlooked because the police dept were convinced they already had the prime suspect.

    Again, only my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I can't honestly understand how this crime could be committed by a single individual. To subdue that many people and even keep up the stamina to repeatedly administer as many blows to the victims. Whether or not GHJ was one of the perpetrators I honestly believe this is the work of more than one individual.

    Also, I've been in many trailers/caravans and they aren't exactly sound proof. The walls are thin and sound easily carries outside. I've been in trailers where I could hear someone walking around in the trailer next door very clearly! Even if the perpetrator(s) managed to keep the victims quiet I believe such brutal and vicious blows would be audible. Dependant on the time of day this incident occured I highly doubt that someone didn't hear something suspicious?

    I feel the crime scene was poorly processed and relevant evidence was overlooked because the police dept were convinced they already had the prime suspect.

    Again, only my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Who did do this if it wasn't GHJ and what motive? Why everyone slaughtered? The Prosecution said no unknown DNA was found in the trailer. Another witness said the car GHJ was driving would never have been willingly lent by its owner to anyone. If a guilty Heinze had left the crime scene in this vehicle, would there not be evidence? I read a mobile phone belonging to one of the victims and with blood of two others was found in the car; could this blood found on Heinze's briefs be explained by the phone being sometime in his pocket? How easy is it to bust the barrel from a shotgun? It struck me as odd, little detail is available about this second gun. Was this the gun which was stolen? The toxicology report: besides standard testing for alcohol and illegal substances, it is necessary to be looking for something to find it. I am not convinced of his innocence or his guilt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remember one person was still alive. He knew this and wouldn't he have made sure to not leave a witness. His actions were not that of the murderer..

      Delete
    2. Remember one person was still alive. He knew this and wouldn't he have made sure to not leave a witness. His actions were not that of the murderer..

      Delete
    3. A 3 y/o with severe brain damage barely hanging on to life would not be able to ID him. And his actions were indeed that of a murderer.

      Delete
    4. boy J u know the whole story it seems NO HIS ACTIONS WERE NOT OF A MURDERER and idiot can clearly see THERES NOOOOO PROOF

      Delete
    5. There were TWO people alive, and GHJ is who found them alive and was screaming for the police and medics to hurry because someone was still breathing. It sounds like all of the adults living in this trailer had issues. They were all into some type of illegal activity. Guy was a petty criminal, at best. He would not have been able to commit these murders alone, NEVER. I do not feel that he had any involvement. I do not see him being THAT good of an actor. Also, they are trying to say that he did all of this over a bottle of Vicodin? A little extreme, if you ask me. The police messed up. They made up their minds that GHJ did it and they obviously did not have the training/knowledge on how to handle a case of this caliber. They should have brought in the FBI or somebody with more experience. I hope Guy gets out. Such a travesty of justice, in my opinion.

      Delete
  22. I became aware of this when I watched the BBC life and death row- obviously I am not an officer, I am not an expert but I believe Guy Heinz Jr did NOT do this horrible homicide, you could see the pain in his eyes while the trial was going on, #FreeGuy - I am only 14 years old but I can tell he didn't do it and I think the jury has made a massive mistake, his brother Tyler was absolutely distraught- Crimes like this make me sick but I know he didn't do it, the police didn't do certain tests that would have the truth like the blood dna tests on the clothing in the bathroom- so many more things could have been done to reveal the truth

    ReplyDelete
  23. I also first heard about this case when I watched the documentary made by BBC. This is probably one of the most obvious wrong convictions I have ever seen. I can't believe he was even accused to begin with. They where all doing drugs and committing criminal acts, I have no doubt that it was payback for a bad drug deal gone wrong, I also have no doubt that multiple people committed the crime. You don't need to know much about forensic to read that crime scene, and know that it would not only be impossible for one person to do it, but that had he tried it, he would have been covered in wounds. I get upset when jurors judge someone on their behaviour during trail, none of them are psycologists,there are no guidelines as how to proper react to seeing crime photos of your farther. The police did a poor job on the crime scene and never even investigated other possibilities.

    ReplyDelete
  24. RIP, Joanna.

    http://goo.gl/jjO9yv

    ReplyDelete
  25. Watched BBC documentary, possible scenario: family argument escalates, (it was mentioned that Guys father had received some money which can be a powerful motivator) & results in killing spree by family member/members (2 could have acted together & one then turns on other), a high/coming down from a high Guy returns home to be greeted by scene and remaining killer/killers, in his anger and distress he then in turn kills possible other killer/killers?? Was this investigated, would explain how no other DNA?? Although in this case I would have expected Guy to have more blood on his clothing which can;t be explained.

    ReplyDelete
  26. has anyone got a link to the crime scence pics ??

    ReplyDelete
  27. I watched the show on the murders this morning and what the episode showed was far from all of it. After reading as many articles and transcripts as I could (which I am sure were not all of them) it seems that there was definetely reasonable doubt, which would have made sense for the jury to find the verdict of not guilty. In addition, my opinion of the one juror being removed seems more than a little problematic. That was the one juror who was not going with the guilty verdict. So why not get rid of him?!?! Really? I don't know if the Heinze is guilty or not but from the evidence that was shown I do believe that there was reasonable doubt. Therefore Not Guilty! I have seen too much rail roading and that seems to be evident especially with some of the evidence that was never collected. I.E. the blood in the bathroom. Maybe he was involved, but once again there was not really a motive. He just seems to me like he was considered a bad man because of his drug involvement and there was too much evidence ignored. I will state one last time that I think there was reasonable doubt which requires a Not Guilty verdict whether he was really guilty or not, it was not proven.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Kelly, apparently you ignored the fact that the juror was kicked off the jury for repeated misconduct. You also ignored the fact that Heinze waived any legal challenges on appeal to the juror being kicked off. So, it is a NON-ISSUE.

    Heinze is guilty of murdering 8 people It does not matter that a bunch of people who did not hear all the evidence or the instructions by the court disagree. He will be spending the rest of his life in prison where he belongs.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I have reviewed all publicly available information that I can get my hands on in the UK and I do not feel that the prosecution, in this case, met the burden of proof required for a guilty verdict. The police department acted incompetently from delaying his bail initially due to "waiting for an ankle device" all the way through to the chain of evidence. They took photos of a shirts with blood transfer on it yet never collected and retained the shirt for forensic analysis of the blood. This in itself is a huge oversight as none of the family members were in the vicinity of the shirt and a Dan test of the blood could have placed Guy at the scene or identified alternative suspects. I do not believe that a single man, let alone a single crack head stoned off his face, could murder 8 people, including relatively fit and healthy men, by beating to death without himself sustaining injuries or one of the victims escaping to raise the alarm. As for the smoking gun, the forensic expert stated unequivocally that the pattern of blood was smeared indicating transfer, rather than spatter that would have indicated his presence during the assaults. In order to pass a guilty verdict there can be absolutely no doubt of the suspect's guilt. In this case that burden was not even remotely met. Even the jurors interviewed for the documentary stated that they were confused during the trial and the deliberations and that on multiple occasions they were upset and emotional. This needs looking at again independently. Until then however, I wish Guy Heinze Jr all the best, and I hope eventually the truth will out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spellcheck changed DNA to Dan... Sorry

      Delete
  30. Even Steve wonder could see this man is innocent wow like really was he a Navy seal or train assassin to kill 8 people and no one put up a fight ?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I have just watched the documentry made, & was horrified this poor man was found guilty.
    There is no way he could have done this by himself, no matter how drug addled he was.....someone would have escaped or someone would have heard something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I kept up with the trial through Jacksonville news daily coverage. No way Guy did this. Corrupt small town GA injustice once again

      Delete
  32. He's guilty and where he belongs, groupies!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. he's NOT GUILTY and you my friend will soon see

      Delete
  33. I'm still waiting for one of you twats to acknowledge that the owner of this blog died a year ago. smh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read through the whole blog and didn't see anything about that except where you stated R.I.P. and gave a link -- I usually don't click on links so I figured you were close to the family or something. So sad the person died. I also watched the documentary and I felt there was reasonable doubt. I know you feel sure that he was guilty and I think you said you knew him, however I'm not saying he was guilty or innocent -- just that there was not enough evidence to convict this man and thus he should go free until such time as his guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Just my take. Again, sorry for the loss of the blog author.

      Delete
    2. I left the link to her obituary. That you dont click on links is ridiculous. She had 4 small children. I am underwhelmed by yours and everyone else's concern. And no I never said I knew him. Sheesh!

      Delete
    3. heres i am so the owner of this blog died a year ago the blog is still up so write away and to the author of this page R I P !!!! and to you J go back to your shaddy research

      Delete
  34. An innocent young man railroaded into prison by yet another small town Georgia corrupt criminal justice system

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guilty as hell and afforded a fair trial and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Delete
  35. Crazy. Trailers are not exactly sound proof, no one heard a thing? And what about the guy that survived? This is weird.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You mean the 3 y/o "guy" who survived with brain damage? You groupies...smh

      Delete
  36. Crazy. Trailers are not exactly sound proof, no one heard a thing? And what about the guy that survived? This is weird.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Three years after conviction and no appeal. Family not talking. Heinze covered in prison tats, hiding illegal cell phones up his ass, has himself a fiance, aka, doormat, and doing lots of time in "the hole."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. You sound so ridiculous! Clearly you don't know Guy or anything about how he is doing his time. Everything you just stated was false.

      Delete
    3. One can see his before and after photos of his prison tats. And are you calling his family liars? They have commented on him and the illegal cellphones and doing time in the hole. No wonder they dont like you, doormat. And you are probably the source for the illegal cellphones. Wonderful...

      Delete
    4. So you two are in direct contact with Guy and his family? Will there be a retrial? Obviously there are flaws in this case performed by Glynn County however there is a sense of consistency. �� I hope eventually the truth will surface, motive will be admitted, and justice will be served.

      Delete
  38. I would have liked to think that if GHJ had done it, he would've been drenched in blood and would've had to leave to dispose of the bloody clothes. Also he would need to shower. If he showered there, wouldn't evidence of that be obvious? Upon inspection of his body, wouldn't they be able to tell if he was freshly showered and clean versus not clean from being outside smoking crack? Why would he risk leaving the trail or still soaked in blood, leaving traces of it in the car. So ultimately he would've had to get clean at the trailer and thus there would've been evidence of that. People ask how nobody heard anything, or was awoken to the sounds of someone being killed, well wasn't there window units on and floor fans in some of the rooms...in that case I can see how nobody heard anything suspicious. It's possible one man could do that if he was careful to be quiet and ensure the first initial few hits to the head was enough to render them unconscious. I get confused though about the girl and her boyfriend...if they were sleeping next to eachother, surely the other would've woke up right? I heard that the girl had defensive wounds on her hands or arms..possibly from waking up to her boyfriend getting hit then quickly getting hit herself. I think it's possible for one man to do all that. If he was high on crack, he was wired and amped up, having the stamina it took to hit each person over 20 times. It just doesn't make any sense though...why kill them all, what could he gain from that? It's not like his dad had a huge life insurance policy and he killed everyone to ensure he got all the money. But back to the evidence...what if he was naked when they were killed, therefor no bloody clothes to dispose of. What about footprints? Fingerprints? Soo many questions!!

    ReplyDelete
  39. I watched the TV documentary and there was not nearly enough evidence *fully presented* in that to be sure either way. Based on the evidence shared on TV, there did not seem to be 'beyond reasonable doubt'; however, I think it is highly probable that he was involved in the murders. Here are some thoughts:

    1. the blood on his shorts being smeared not splattered. If there was a lot of blood on an outer layer of clothing, it might soak through in especially dense areas and as the clothes moved against each other might give rise to the 'blood marks with smearing' on his undershorts. Had outer layers of clothing been removed after the killing and fresh outer layers put on, you'd get precisely what the jury saw.

    2. If he had been checking on the victims, why was there blood on his under shorts and not on his outer shorts? From what I saw, doesn't this evidence suggest a change of outer clothes?

    3. Removing a gun that he claimed be *bought/obtained* 'hot/stolen' and which later turned out to be registered to one of the victims is interesting. This does not appear to be a mistake or confusion. It seems to be a clear-cut lie. Why would an innocent man remove it at all? Why would a guilty man? I don't know, but I find it easier to think a man who had just killed lots of people with the barrel of a shotgun might remove the second one, than an innocent man would do and say what GHJ did.

    4. I did not see normal emotion during the trial *on TV* from GHJ. It looked more like a stunted display of shallow emotion. He seemed quite cool during the trial and delivery of the verdict. Surely an innocent man would not only be horrified by the evidence shown, but terrified of a guilty verdict.

    5. Why say on the 911 call that they looked like they were beaten to death? even the police did not assume that. This is tenuous circumstantial stuff against GHJ and not enough to convict him, but it fits a developing larger picture.


    Could he have done it alone? Yes, I actually think so, especially if the strong male victims were separated and asleep. Sure, it would be difficult, but if you hit someone over the head with all your might with a shotgun barrel, then they don't get to mount much of a defence. As for noise, if this was a place where people took drugs, fought, argued, again, I am not sure it would be impossible to do alone as a strong make (which GHJ is). As for grip marks around the ankle, a single killer could have done that as he pulled to move bodies, to check they were indeed dead. How would you move a heavy body? By the ankles... Pillow held over the head? No. This was not done to other victims so I think it was incidental: the victim was probably sleeping head under pillow and so he just struck with the weapon with the head underneath.

    The police made lots of mistakes. The evidence on TV was not 100% compelling for guilty (so maybe he should have got off, but the Jury saw a lot more evidence than I did, or anyone on here), but I do suspect he did it. If I were to guess (and that's all it is) I'd say he might have Antisocial personality Disorder (would not constitute a 'mentally ill' verdict by an examiner), he built up a lot of resentment and hatred which he kept a very good lid on most of the time, and then some sort of trigger caused him to detonate. Melissa's comments above fit in well with APD (drugs, temper/rage, coldness/low empathy, trouble making/hard to control). It would also explain the shallow emotional gammut in the trial for his life. One major problem dealing with psychopaths/sociopaths and Narcissist/APD types is that they are very very very good at lying and keeping a lid on themselves under pressure. GHJ might be a totally normal lad who is 100% innocent, but I suspect not. I strongly suspect not, but I wasn't in that trial....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know how a person high off crack, that just found his entire family dead. Would react or think. But I believe him lying about a shotgun and moving it is irrelevant. That should of been evidence for the defendant, because it should of had bloody hand prints, or some kind of blood on it, but it didn't. I guess they could of locked him up for lying, but it wasn't enough evidence to lock him up for murder.

      Delete
    2. They found the stolen rifle in the trunk of the car he was driving that was also stolen from one of the victims. They found another victim's stolen cell phone in his possession. They found a drug vial belonging to a third victim that he stole that night. The vial was kept in the bed table drawer of a fourth victim with papers that had Heinz's bloody prints on it.

      He's guilty and will die in prison.

      Delete
  40. This guy is innocent. Georgia prosecutor is a arrogant, pompous, ass.You can tell that him and the judge have a close relationship. The prosecutor was acting like it was just another case he was going to tuck under his belt. Obviously he's only concerned with his career. Guy deserves a fair trial.If he committed those crimes common sense says he would be a lot more bloodier,he could not have committed these crimes period.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Not enough evidence in my opinion

    ReplyDelete
  42. Classification: Mass murderer
    Characteristics: Killed the first victim in a dispute over a bottle of prescription painkillers he wanted to steal, then killed the others to avoid getting caught
    Number of victims: 8
    Date of murders: August 29, 2009
    Date of arrest: September 4, 2009
    Date of birth: 1987
    Victims profile: His father, Guy Heinze Sr., 45; Rusty Toler Sr., 44, and his four children: Chrissy Toler, 22; Russell D. Toler Jr., 20; Michael Toler, 19; and Michelle Toler, 15; Toler's sister, Brenda Gail Falagan, 49, and Joseph L. West, 30, boyfriend of Chrissy Toler
    Method of murder: Multiple crushing blows to the head from what police believe was a shotgun barrel. The murder weapon was never found
    Location: Glynn County, Georgia, USA
    Status: Sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole on October 30, 2013


    İ dont know if this info is true but i found it while searching on internet here is a lin: http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/heinze-guy.htm

    did he confessioned that he killed over a bottle of painkiller????

    ReplyDelete
  43. COULD he have done it, alone or with other parties? Yes, maybe, probably, possibly… unlikely, doubtful, no. Either way it's answered it's a moot point. Did the prosecution PROVE, beyond a reasonable doubt that he killed them alone or with help? That is the only important question and I don't think anyone feels they did.

    I won't rehash the blood evidence since ALL the evidence was either not collected or not tested. But I'd like to add my thoughts on the use of a gun barrel as the murder weapon. Anyone who's familiar with a shot gun knows this about gun barrels. On one end there is usually a piece of metal attached for a sight. The other end of the barrel once removed from the stock has sharp edges where it's assembled into the stock. Holding either end to administer 220 blows is going to leave some kind of mark, abrasion, cut, blister etc on the user's hands. It's possible it could've been held with a firm grip for some of the blows, but the barrel would become quite slick as blood splatter coated it, causing hands to slide either over the sight or off the attachment end causing hand trauma. Also it was never discussed, but a 6' man swinging a 2-3' shotgun barrel over their head surely would've hit the low trailer ceiling at some point, yet police didn't find any evidenced of this… or if they did it was never made public. If he wanted to kill everyone after killing his father to eliminate witnesses, wouldn't have been far easier to grab a knife and stab them???

    My comments on the campers… its possible that he saw the camper/camp sites but saw no one around. He was asked if he saw "anyone" or "any vehicles". I wouldn't consider a camper a "vehicle" if it's set up and not being used for transportation, especially if it were a pull behind and not one w/ a motor (as with a motor home). And this was "several hours" before finding his family so one can reason that the time he claimed to be in the park would be in the wee hours of the morning. How many of those camping would be awake and outside the camper/tent at this time of the night/morning? He never tried to claim there witnesses who could say one way or the other if he was there.

    I feel he was genuine/honest on the 911 call and this is what lead me to conclude this. He told the 911 dispatcher that he needed to go so he could tell his brother that their dad was dead. He said this a couple of times. When one is faced w/ news of a loved one's sudden death, the normal reaction is to reach out and share that info w/ other loved ones. I've seen this type if reaction to a sufden traumatic event several times during my life. I believe if he had killed his father earlier in the night, he would've had this same impulse to contact someone and share that "news". Having been high on drugs, I doubt he would've been able to control that urge and would've called someone. The shock would've worn off by the 911 call and if that reaction were contrived, it would've sounded made up and like he was lying. Nothing about that call indicated he hadn't found his family JUST mins before.

    Unfortunately, since a thorough and complete investigation wasn't done… no one can complete an investigation and have all the test results back that fast. Real life isn't an episode of CSI or L&O! There's NO WAY possible to collect/submit/test/review ALL the evidence, thoroughly interview ALL witnesses (including suspects), develop alternative theories of the crime, and investigate ANY other possible suspects of a single murder in 5 days, let alone 8 murders. They all had their minds made up an hour after the bodies were found. So I doubt the public will ever know the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Horrible police work. Blood would have covered the murderer from head to toe. Where did he wash up at. And even if he did wash up DNA would of still been under his nails, a speck of blood behind his ear. In his hair or something. Not just one spot on the front of his underwear. That could of happened with him leaning against something. Eight brutal murders, blood everywhere. Ain't that much cleaning yourself up in the world. I wonder if the jury can sleep good at night.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Horrible police work. Blood would have covered the murderer from head to toe. Where did he wash up at. And even if he did wash up DNA would of still been under his nails, a speck of blood behind his ear. In his hair or something. Not just one spot on the front of his underwear. That could of happened with him leaning against something. Eight brutal murders, blood everywhere. Ain't that much cleaning yourself up in the world. I wonder if the jury can sleep good at night.

    ReplyDelete
  46. To explain the prosecutions blood on boxer shorts. I have a habit of placing hands under shorts on top of my thighs when I sit. Comfort thing. How did 12 jurors not have enough doubt to at least have a hung jury. No checks on those who weren murdered as to any of them who wanted either of them killed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One, these were reversible gym shorts he wore under his pants. Two, have you seen the length of his pants? I dont know what you wd call them but while they dont go to his ankles they certainly are not shorts. Three, a comfort thing at the scene of a mass murder????!!!! The jury sleeps very well, because unlike you and the rest of the fan club they heard all the evidence and were instructed on how to evaluate it. You saw a dumb one sided 45 minute video. LOL

      Delete