Killer Cases: Web Search History Leads Investigators to Husband of Murdered Woman | A&E

1. Stay up to date on all of A&E's premieres at http://aetv.com/schedule

2. I hate dumb birds that sympathize with woman abusers.

3. Is this the same woman as the one who was interviewed by Bryan Ross Investigates Amazon, from the FB group Todd Mullis is Innocent? How can having 300 supporters declare Todd Mullis innocent? 🤣 Doesn't sound too intelligent 🤣

4. One should never make so many assumptions based on so few facts.

   We really have to ask ourselves a question: Was the iPad Todd Mullis’?

   That seems to imply complete control. Had Todd filed for divorce from Amy or Amy from Todd what would we expect to hear about the nature of the iPad as to who gets it or pays the other just to keep it? In Iowa it is community property of course. She would have said it was hers and shown access to it via the family known password and use. So, is it really the property of Todd Mullis? Or, is it community property?

   And what about those searches? Incriminating evidence on an electronic device seems too obvious. It seems like something someone desperate might plant on their spouses iPad at the direction of a divorce lawyer. A divorce lawyer might make such a suggestion when her client wants child custody, child support, has been cheating, her husband isn’t likely to suspect the plant, doesn’t know anything about electronics and she wants out so she can get remarried. The divorce lawyer wants evidence to leverage custody and child support payments.

   Who is cheating who in this scenario?

   If there is one thing I have learned in life, it is that cheaters cheat and liars lie. And I would not exclude from this maxim people who label themselves divorce lawyers.

   We should never get too far ahead of ourselves with the assumptions. That iPad was as much Amy’s as it was Todd’s. Amy had as much access, and probably more, to that iPad as did Todd.

   Now ask yourself. Who had motivation to plant evidence to leverage a divorce?

5. 300 random supporters who don’t know a thing vs. police w/evidence and proof
   I wonder who is right

6. With searches like that, there ain’t no convincing a jury of innocence

7. What I can't figure out is why stupid criminals alway Google their crime.

8. We have 300 supporters so he can't be guilty.

9. E o resto do julgamento, ele começou a falar e de repente CORTARAM?👎

10. The American judicial system is so corrupt anymore, u just don't whose innocent anymore.

11. Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

12. Wow

13. Really, it was the husband, what a surprise

14. Oh Laurd!! I hope I never get accused of a violent crime cuz if they look up my browser history…..I'll be convicted

15. The laptop says it all.

16. "He couldn't have killed her" but he did ma'am.

17. I Love Watching A&E So much

18. Shame that a cheater becomes a victim when the spouse kills them. Cheaters are disgusting people.

19. Hey A& E its Kevin Nahachick Lives Slave lake AB Canada

20. Hm

21. Second 🚮

22. I’m ՏᑌᗷᗷIᑎᘜ TO EVERYOá‘Žá—´ ᗯᕼO á’ªIKá—´'Տ TᕼIՏ á‘•Oá—°á—°á—´á‘ŽT á—©á‘Žá—ª ՏᑌᗷՏ á—°á—´…….

23. I'm here

24. Hi

Comments are closed.