Podcasters believe Melanie McGuire is wrongfully convicted: Part 10

Criminology professors Meghan Sacks and Amy Shlosberg argue there are pieces of evidence, such as ballistics, that raise questions. Prosecutors believe the right person is behind bars.
7:12 | 09/26/20

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Podcasters believe Melanie McGuire is wrongfully convicted: Part 10
Wow After sentencing, Melanie Mcguire was taken to the Edna Mahan correctional facility in Clinton, New Jersey. Her new home would be a six by It's just beginning for us now. We'll never give up. We will never, ever give up for her until the truth comes out. On "Direct appeal" we exane the murder conviction of Melanie Mcguire. This is a prepaid call from Melanie Mcguire. An inmate at Edna Mahan correctional facility. All right, obviously Melanie's been convicted. She's exhausted all of her appeals at this point. So how did the idea for this podcast come about? Melanie Mcguire was looking to speak with someone about her story, because she had done really poorly in the court system, and I think she was frustrated. And after visiting with her the first time I was like, this a story. This is important. I expected the worst and what I got was just one step shy. They give the verdict, parole eligible at the tender age of 101. It was very difficult. It was reliving it. This was the first time somebody was basically saying, we hear you. What do you say? Let's get to the juicy part. I want to know. Do you think she is innocent or guilty? In the end I believe that Melanie Mcguire was wrongfully convicted. So, you believe an innocent woman is behind bars right now? Absolutely. I believe this is a case of a wrongful conviction. So, let's talk about some of the questions you raise in your podcast, and let's begin with the gun. The gun, to this day, has never been recovered. One of the key witnesses for the prosecution was a forensic ballistic expert. These are two discharged bullets. They're referred to as a .38 caliber lead wad cutter bullet. Is it possible that the gun Melanie bought is not actually the murder weapon? I think it's probable. No one plugged the serial number of my gun into a website to find out what the specifications were. Apparently each gun makes something called lands and grooves. Lands and grooves are rifling characteristics that are machine-pressed into the barrel of a gun, and when the bullet passes through the barrel, the same number of lands and grooves are going to be imprinted, essentially, onto that bullet. There were five lands and grooves that my weapon was said to have made based on the company's website. The bullets that came out of my husband had six lands and grooves. It was a mistake on a gun manufacturer's website. We were not gathering evidence from a gun manufacturer's website. The evidence that was at trial was from ballistic experts. But the website was updated. It was. After this trial to incorporate the possibility that it could have five or six. Five or six, yeah. I thought that was questionable. I think it's very questionable that for years, historically it says one thing, and then it's updated right after. Let's talk about the garbage bags. The prosecution had an expert that said that the garbage bag in which bill's body was found in was consistent with the garbage bags that came from Melanie's apartment. You can see these lines here is a straight line here, this sort of smooth line. There's also two other lines close together in basically the exact same position. This indicates that these two bags were made at the same facility on the same line within a very close proximity of time. He ran tests. But he didn't do all the tests that you actually need to definitively say whether these bags match. Even his own data shows that they probably weren't the same bags. Well, there are all these other tests that can be done in any analysis. Based on the testing we had conducted and the results that I observed, I felt confident at that time to conclude that the bags were produced during the same run. They put on a really good show. And I think when you have props, two garbage bags -- oh, wow, those do look alike. And so what the jurors are listening to sounds like fact, when, in reality, it's just someone's expert opinion. There is something else that's significant that you think the jury should have heard more about. It was found inside those If you look through the lab reports, page upon page upon page -- white hair, brown hair, black hair, animal hair. I think that's more indicative that there was animal hair where the dismemberment of bill's body. You mentioned that you found some animal hairs. Did you find anything that you considered of evidential value? No. They looked high and low to connect Melanie to some pet, and once they found that there was no way to connect Melanie to these pet hairs, it became not of evidentiary value. Why is that? Simply because they don't match your suspects? Those hair should have been tested, because that's a huge question mark. Melanie did not incapacitate, shoot, use a saw to dismember her husband. Do you know how hard it is to cut through bone? It is physically exhausting. And also, if the crime scene didn't happen there and she's home with her children all nigh, where is this happening? There are just too many holes in this story. In this case with the mountain of evidence against her and a very complex plan, I submit to you it's amazing we know as much as we do. This was a murder trial. It wasn't a contest to see who could outsmart the investigators, and if someone is smart enough to successfully hide a crime scene that they win. Did you find any evidence that exonerates Melanie, that proves her innocence? I wish we did. Had hoped we would. I still think we might get a tip in that direction. What do you say to the people at home who watch this and say, how dare she talk from prison and bring this all back up again? Enough pain has already befallen her husband's family, her own sons. There's a murder walking around. Even if we discount what's happened to me, the killer is out there, and it's not me. She had about as good a counsel as money could buy. She certainly had a fair and impartial jury. The fact of the matter is, sometimes the evidence is such that your attorneys, no matter what you pay them, they simply cannot overcome what you have done. She can say whatever she wants. She's a liar and a killer. Today your boys are young men. They are. Is there anything you want to Imagine a future where one day machine learning

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"7:12","description":"Criminology professors Meghan Sacks and Amy Shlosberg argue there are pieces of evidence, such as ballistics, that raise questions. Prosecutors believe the right person is behind bars.","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/2020","id":"73252321","title":"Podcasters believe Melanie McGuire is wrongfully convicted: Part 10","url":"/2020/video/podcasters-melanie-mcguire-wrongfully-convicted-part-10-73252321"}