Mechele Linehan Is Guilty!

Mechele Linehan: Free Me Not!

The purpose of this blog is to overturn the latest lies Mechele Linehan is spewing since release on bail. She is reinventing the facts for PR purposes. We are doing this by setting forth a view of many of the facts as we know them in a cohesive account of major issues. Facts are based on verified sources including authentic copies of critical emails and documents (e.g., copy of voicemail message ML left with New York Life Insurance), audio recordings of ML's full first forty-five-minute interview with Alaska State Troopers, newspaper articles/accounts, etc.

For example, in her most recent 'theories,' ML is attempting to deny ANY possibility that John Carlin III killed Kent Leppink, as if his trial never occurred. Though JC's conviction was overturned only because he did not complete the appeals process, ML thinks it is viable to dismiss JC altogether as having committed the murder, and thereby herself and all those incriminating emails and other documents from the evidence in her retrial. What folly! Pat Gullufsen, who is an outstanding prosecutor, will simply reestablish the foregone conclusion that John Carlin killed KL with ML involvement. 

ML's Facebook page actually has one of her supporters, "Babs," soliciting the public for 'assistance in investigating the Internet for further information that would buttress a case for Kent Leppink killing himself or for KL's family being involved in his murder' [!!!!!]

The audio tapes reveal ML to be a cigarette-smoking (she asks for an ashtray), foul-mouthed (she refers to KL's stuff as sh_t) liar. When asked if she knew of anybody who had a problem with KL, despite JC making clear in his emails that he detested KL, ML, off koss, fails to mention him and suggests only Gary, one of KL's fishing boat acquaintances. That she knew KL was dead before the troopers interviewed her is apparent from the fact that she states JC picked her up from the airport on her return from Lake Tahoe and drove her home.

Jeff Feldman and Susan Orlansky, ML's appellate attorneys, handled her appeal allegedly pro bono. They are considered among the best criminal defense attorneys available. The fact that they chose not to represent ML at her retrial indicates their assessment of ML's upcoming trial as fraught with problems. If they viewed her case as an egregious miscarriage of justice, as ML and her supporters claim, they could have elected to represent her on a pro bono basis owing to high attorneys fees accrued for first trial.