conviction- Murder in Suburbia

I think he did it. There were a lot of questions he couldn't answer and his reasons for not taking lie detector test after saying he would made me doubt him after firstly believing his innocence. I also couldn't see why his wife would stage her own death, leave her blood in his car to frame him. What would she gain from that?

I watched it and I think he did it. I believed the forensic evidence and that the blood couldn't be planted. I also questioned his reasons for not taking the lie detector test, and the fact that he had worn different trousers to the ones handed over (which he was caught wearing on CCTV - they had been washed but were they checked for hidden blood stains?) He had no proper alibi, just "walking about". His wife had not touched her bank accounts or contacted her children, and had lost her phone - I couldn't see her starting a new life and doing some random blood planting. For me it was a toss-up between the husband and Halliwell, but in the end I think it was the husband. Fascinating programme I thought.

Yes very engrossing. Watched both episodes last night. Originally I thought he was innocent and that Halliwell was implicated but I think refusing the lie detector was very telling. It was concerning that the blood wasn't picked up till the 3rd examination though. His minimum sentence will have been served next year. Can parole be granted without an admission of guilt??

I was exactly like everyone thinking he was innocent but then deciding probably not. I suppose if they could have shown it was a miscarriage of justice he could have claimed damages for wrongful imprisonment.

^ It was concerning that the blood wasn't picked up till the 3rd examination though^
The first examination was not done under forensically rigorous conditions so there was no surprise there at all. The boot was presumably looked at for a body, clothing, anything else suspicious, in the rain and in poor light therefore it was not surprising that the blood was missed.

Under proper laboratory conditions the blood was detected in a pattern consistent with a body have been in the boot. It would have been impossible for an individual to have 'placed' a pattern of blood like that - and, if, as alleged, Linda Razzel had returned to the car a few days later before it was seized, then how come no-one saw her? Why would she have done that - if you want to leave your husband you do not sneak back with the risk of being seen to plant evidence to suggest that he killed you.
She left with no clothes, no money, no passport.
Any suggestions that she knew Halliwell were spurious allegations.

There are miscarriages of justice but I do not believe that this was one of them.

'having been'

Yes, I watched it, and I think he did it.

I think Halliwell is a red herring. I don't think he had anything to do with it. I think the husband did it. He sounds far to sure of himself, and has had time to formulate his lies.

I think so too.
What did pop into my mind when watching this programme was, if he had strangled his wife there wouldn’t have been any blood, and as there was no body, doubtful that he would have been found guilty.
No Mother vanishes and never gets in contact with her children again.

There wasn't a lot of blood, just discrete spots and occasional smears located all over the boot.
So how did he kill her? Or was she still alive and moving around when he put her in the boot? It really doesn't bear thinking about.
I don't think we needed a polygraph to detect that he was lying in later telephone conversations with the investigator.

By all accounts, she was a very devoted mother so I don't think she would have gone and never contacted her children again. They apparently want nothing to do with their father. Added to which he had a history of alleged domestic violence which his supporters claim was not proven.

Yes he will be released after his 18 years but he will remain on licence till his death. This means if he commits an offence of any serious type he will go straight back to prison. I can see him committing the murder. His domestic violence charge he just thought was nothing. His alibi of a two hour walk seemed very convenient! As for his about turn on the lie detector test , that spoke volumes. If his four children have nothing to do with him then there will be a very good reason in my opinion.

Felt uncomfortable just listening to him, seems a controller , I do think he killed his wife .

Guilty as charged I say. For all the reasons printed here. I know you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but he looked shifty.

The forensic evidence was quite conclusive. The idea that Linda went back and planted it herself is feeble.