Update on Nancy Dillard Lyon’s Killer
(“Writer’s Block,” Forensic Files)
The last post told the story of the poisoning death of Richard Lyon’s wife, architect Nancy Dillard Lyon, at the age of 37, in a case covered by Forensic Files episode “Writers Block.”
Richard Lyon pleaded not guilty at his 1991 murder trial. But a Texas court rejected his blame-the-victim strategy, which included a contention that Nancy had brought about her own slow demise by intentionally consuming arsenic and barium carbonate over a long period of time.
A jury convicted him of first-degree murder, and Lyon began a life sentence at the W.F. Ramsey Unit prison farm at the tender age of 34.
Sorry, sir. He became eligible for parole 15 years later in 2006. That bid was rejected, although the Texas Department of Justice website gives no explanation.
To order the book:
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
On his most recent review date, February 3, 2016, a parole board denied him again and specified the reasons as “elements of brutality, violence” and “conscious selection of victim’s vulnerability.”
He posed “a continued threat to public safety,” according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
His next chance will come in 2021, when he’s 64.
In the meantime, Richard Lyon denies that he murdered his wife.
No rescue. A website created by his supporters solicits pro bono legal help. He maintains that he had nothing to do with Nancy’s death:
“His supposed crime was that he poisoned his wife, Nancy, so he could inherit her money and status in the community and then, begin his new life with his mistress. This narrative has been spewed for decades and portrayed in film in addition to being plastered all over the Internet.”
Lyon has applied to the Innocence Project of Texas and New York, the Thurgood Marshall School of Law Innocence Project, and the House of Renewed Hope.
So far, those organizations have declined to take on his case.
Dillard parents. If he ever does get out, he won’t find Tami Ayn Gaisford — the co-worker with whom he began an affair while married to Nancy — waiting for him. She still lives in Texas but married someone else.
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
As for updates on family members of the Lyons, I wasn’t able to find out who took custody of the couple’s little daughters after Richard went to prison. But Allison and Anna are adults now.
Nancy’s father, William “Big Daddy” Dillard, died in 2006 after a 59-year marriage to Sue Stubbs Dillard that produced four children. She passed away in 2009.
(They are not the same Dillards who founded the Dillard’s department store chain. Nancy’s family made its fortune in commercial real estate.)
Another tragedy. Incidentally, William and Sue Dillard had already lost one of their adult children, Thomas, in 1986. He died of a brain tumor.
In murdering Nancy five years later, Richard Lyon took away yet another child from the Dillard family.
Let’s hope someone brings that up at the 2021 parole hearing.
That’s all for this post. Until next week, cheers. — RR
Update on July 11, 2018: Two corrections were made to the post — the website asks for legal help, not monetary donations, and the site itself was created by supporters, according to a representative for Friends of Richard Lyon.
Watch the Forensic Files episode on YouTube
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Books-a-Million
Target
Walmart
Indie Bound
“he could inherit her money and status in the community…” Interesting thought, that predators are stealing status, along with material spoils.
I guess his greed knew no bounds.
The girls were raised by the Dillard family and changed their surnames to Dillard. At least one of them is already married.
Thanks for writing in with the information. Their decision to change their names is definitely understandable.
Well I do hope their uncle did not destroy the children’s innocence. He already destroyed Nancy’s and the family did nothing but look the other way. Smart move on the states side. Give the predator two more victims.
Didn’t you listen to the trial? It was determined that Richard wrote the notes about her brother.
Richard made that up in the diary remember???? This was not true.
The psychiatrist said otherwise.
Did you actually listen to the whole thing? That never happened. Richard made that up about her brother. It came out in the trial.
I hope he is so miserable.
That was my thought when her brother, who molested her so bad she needed surgical repair, filed for custody of her GIRLS before Nancy was barely cold in her grave! Couldn’t wait to get his hands on two more little girls, better yet THESE girls came with a hefty inheritance from their mother, who he victimized repeatedly as a child! And then there was the grandfather who gave his son a pass about the whole thing!! Geeze what a family!!
You certainly didn’t pay close attention to the episode. Richard forged the part of the diary about the abuse. It never happened! He’s a sociopath, through and through.
The psychiatrist treating her phoned the lawyer to tell him of the abuse which Nancy confessed to her.
Didn’t YOU pay close attention.!!??!? Her Therapist SAID that her brother molested her.!
Nice try Richard.
All of that was a lie written in Nancy’s diary by Richard.
.
What if the brother framed his brother in law due to jealousy
Yes, True… I Don’t believe Richard did it.!!!!
Agree!
And the girls were very young when they were adopted by Nancy’s brother, so of course they took the Dillard’s name; however, one did keep Lyon as a middle name, which would have been done as an adult. These women never had the chance to know their father and were raised with the Dillards who I am sure told them repeatedly that there father was a murderer. Watch Michael Morten’s documentary, Life After Life.
Dick Lyin’. What a slime bag. All the evidence against him and he still won’t fess up to his crime. I say keep the arrogant a hole in prison indefinitely.
The quoted remark is senseless: money – yes; status – no.
As FF presents it, there’s little doubt Lyon’s guilty. Who buys accidental poisoning? Who buys suicide? Who had a stronger motive than him? The inheriting of considerable wealth (presumably) has been a perfectly sufficient motive for numerous others murderers – and while it’s no proof in itself, what makes it unlikely in his case in the absence of stronger contenders AND with other suspicious circumstances AND with a wife he evidently cared little for given his affair?
And there can be few crueler ways to kill than this appalling manner. He should NOT be paroled.
Not to mention his arrogance in continuing to deny what he did and actually soliciting legal help to get away with it.
30 years in jail — I don’t think you can say he got away with it! Worse criminals don’t serve that much sometimes. And suppose HE IS innocent, why should you call him arrogant, and why would he admit to something he did not do?
I AGREE..!!!
Not much different from Stolen Valor. Lies, thievery, and in this case cold blooded murder. Adultery and greed are characteristics of the young lady’s husband. He’s where he needs to be.
he’s innocent
And pigs fly south for the winter.
Hahahahaha!!! Perfect!
Any update? Was he paroled in 2021?
He’s still in prison, according to the Texas DOC.
Parole was denied on 03/01/2021. Next parole date is 2/2026.
That’s what I came here to find out after watching this episode. Thanks.
For those who are curious, Anna and Allison are both well. They both took the last name of Dillard and Anna got married in 2015 at the arboretum, which has an exhibit in her mother’s honor. Allison is a costume desisigner.
So glad to hear they are both doing well and that their mother’s design talent was passed down — thanks much for writing in!
I’m following up: do either of the daughters have a relationship with their father?
Not sure about that. All I know is what commenters have said — that both daughters grew up to be accomplished adults.
Allison and Anna wish to be left alone by EVERYONE.
Understandable, that the daughters wish to be left alone, but people are curious, including me. It’s not like any sane person would go knocking on their door (other than possible reporters, that is).
Of course, I’m sure they wish their mother was alive too. The person who did this (which I believe is Richard) sure didn’t think twice about what was good for them.
Especially their murderer of a father who killed their mother I’m sure.
Given the terrible death he inflicted on their mother, I’d be surprised (but certainly wouldn’t judge them; when they’ve lost one, the other, however poor, may be better than none).
I wonder if they believe his innocent claim? They must have a view regardless of expressing it…
I’m sure we all wish them well and are sorry for their loss.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they do . . . but only because they WANT to. No sane person would see the evidence, then actually believe that Richard is innocent. The amount of evidence is HUGE! Nancy told her doctor about the times she already believed Richard drugged her: the pop at the movie, a nightcap that left her severely sick on the bathroom floor, not to mention those “vitamins” that made her sick. She told the doctor (her psychiatrist/psychologist) that she believed Richard was systematically poisoning her – that’s directly from the victim! Also, when she was dying in the hospital, she told the doctor there that she thought Richard was poisoning her (the doctor waited until Richard finally left her side)! Then, there’s the empty capsules found at Richard’s, and especially the bogus so-called-receipt, that Nancy supposedly signed, for a number of poisons, that Richard “found”. It was a fake receipt that Richard “discovered” himself, that pointed away from Richard, and blamed the victim! And it was fake. OBVIOUSLY, he created it. And let’s not forget that, among even more evidence (like Richard previously emptying their bank accounts, and not knowing Nancy changed the beneficiary on her life insurance…), there’s the long vacation he took with his mistress less than 5 weeks after Nancy died. After seeing the evidence, you’d have to be an idiot to believe Richard, if you’re thinking in your right mind. I bet you that “Friends of Richard Lyon” are either one or both of his daughters, or someone he’s dating or doing a sweetheart hustle on from jail (a common hustle where inmates answer singles ads and con women into sending them money).
Well said. No matter how much he lies about it, the truth is clear as day. He did it and he’s right where he belongs. He should never get out.
Sociopaths are pathological liars and will lie to the bitter end unless there is something in it for them to be truthful.
Doubt they believe he is innocent since they took their mom’s surname Dillard. People don’t normally do that when they have a positive relationship with their father.
Legal Eagle: With them taking the name Dillard–they could have very well done so to stay away from the media, and to be left alone!!
Lovely!
I was wondering how they were doing! That couldn’t had been easy for them. I’m so glad they had the support of others to get them through the loss of their mother & the cause of her death based over their dad! If you could call him that! By him wanting to be a cheating Male S…..(you know what I mean)
I know I need to be nice! But hopefully he sees the pain he put Nancy’s daughters her whole family & friends through!! For someone that had money Richard claimed to battle with ants. Situation like that they could had hired to handle the cause of the issue! Which had proven his lies!! He thought Nancy was a money making machine!!!!
Thank for the update!
Rot in that cell you scumbag Richard Lyon. Life in Prison looks good on you! I’m sure you’ve had many more “affairs” in the Prison showers, but not with good looking bimbos lol. Don’t drop the soap Richie!!
Excellent! Maybe his gf gave him soap on the rope?
Scumbag!
Richard is innocent. Nancy’s death was accidental and preventable. Evidence was circumstantial. It would behoove people to actually read the trial transcripts and think. Sensationalizing this with false narratives and TV crime drama does not help anyone involved. This is such a tragic case for all involved. Ironically, Texas is the leading state in false convictions and leads the nation in exonerations with 23 in 2017 alone! We in Connecticut who know him and his family, maintain that he is innocent. If you have a specific comment and question, please post it on the website http://www.richardlyon.org and we will be happy to address it.
Richard is the only one with enough contact and motive. He was cruel and callous in watching her slowly die! He left an irrefutable paper trail that shows he bought it. Men murder their wives all the time. He’s a man that didn’t want to be married, pay child support, and keep her insurance policy. He’s right where he belongs!
The real “person” who had enough contact and motive was the hospital in its efforts to avoid a wrongful death/malpractice suit. Read what CCA pressure treated wood can do. Interesting correlation https://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/26/us/the-poison-is-arsenic-and-the-suspect-wood.html.
Stop lying !
Agreed EK, agreed.
So it’s the hospital’s fault now? No longer her brother’s or her colleague’s as he tried to imply when he testified in his own defense? I hope he rots in jail for the rest of his pathetic life. Taking a mother from her kids proves he’s pure evil and also, the fact that not one single legal nonprofit wanted to take his case speaks volumes. As far as I’m concerned, this is the best possible outcome to a very tragic story.
Talk about clutching at straws! I’ve heard it all now…
And the “hospital” filled capsules with poison and told Nancy they were vitamins??? Oh wait, no, that was BEFORE she went to the hospital.
But it must be the hospital who Nancy said gave her a nightcap that made her deathly ill, or gave her strange tasting pop at the movies with a strange powder floating on top? On, no, that was Richard.
But Nancy said the HOSPITAL was trying to systematically poison her? Oh, no – Richard again!
And was it the hospital that forged documents to make it look like Nancy ordered the arsenic? No, it’s a forged document, that Richard “found”, that would have helped to clear Richard . . . figure it out.
Plus, the fact that the case is largely circumstantial, doesn’t matter. I’ve never seen such a strong largely circumstantial case. Fingerprints and DNA aren’t going to matter a bit when they both live in the same damn house. HOWEVER, the paper trail leading to Richard, regarding the ordering of the fatal poisons is not circumstantial, and neither is the fraudulent receipt provided by Richard.
Please tell me . . . exactly how are you saying that the hospital gave Nancy Lyons arsenic? Or is it supposedly the pressure treated wood? That only affected Nancy, and not the rest of her family?
Do you know how to spot a liar with a business proposal? One way is when they talk about the overall market, or other general information, instead of talking about the facts of THAT particular business. I noticed that “The Friends of Richard Lyons” does that. General facts about wrongful convictions, general facts about pressure treated wood (that, unless she was eating it constantly, wouldn’t give her those levels of arsenic in her system). Anything but discuss the actual facts.
This comment on behalf of this scum is as sick as the scum himself. Being that easily fooled makes you look as gullible as him for imagining he could twist and turn things around and play the blame the victim game and win. Evil never wins. You need to quit polluting the atmosphere not just the memory of the real victims Nancy and her family.
He is right where he needs be to keep society safe. His evil can suffocate him, for all i know, it would be only minus one scum to live on society’s tax payers’ income as he deserved death. He gave death so he deserved the same, but being locked up is still good so he knows he cannot and will not get to enjoy life in Liberty…ah ah ah joke on him!
I hope he rots slowly where he is.
Exactly. He’s a murderer. She loved him unconditionally and he latched onto her for his own gain. Never loved her. Preyed upon her. He’s where he belongs. Evil he is. May he be haunted every day and night by what he’s done.
Note: It may well serve anyone positively to refuse to eat or drink anything offered or prepared by a soon-to-be-ex. If Nancy had done so, chances are she would still be with us. So at the first sign of trouble in a marriage STOP! Follow your gut feeling–and live!
“She loved him unconditionally and he latched onto her for his own gain. Never loved her. Preyed upon her. ”
And you know this how? Do you have evidence or first hand account?
Have you ever read the data and studies around the behavior of a sexually abused female? Why no outrage over what Bill Jr. did and what state would ever hand over two young girls to such a man?
To say this was “accidental” is absolute insanity. You don’t “accidentally” fill capsules with poison (and the empty capsules were in his apartment), and you don’t “accidentally” take a severe poison over a long period of time. You also don’t “accidentally” forge documents. Not to mention the woman herself actually saying she thought her husband was trying to poison her! To actually expect people to buy that is insanity. You’re crazy (or stupid) if you believe that. And yes, there are MANY innocent people in jail, and on death row, especially in Texas. It certainly doesn’t mean that’s the case here, and I don’t believe it is. A preponderance of evidence shows that he did this terrible crime. To actually say it was “accidental”? Ridiculous.
Ah yes, the little known “accidental” death by ingesting capsules filled with rat poison, then moving onto arsenic in nightcaps and pop (based on Nancy’s own words regarding poison in her drinks) when the rat poison didn’t work out, THEN followed up by a forged receipt “found” by Richard to cover up the “accidental” poisoning, making it look like Nancy ordered the poison, along with other forged documents (something that always happens in accidental poisonings – oh, wait, no, it doesn’t). And this isn’t based on sensationalism. Feel free to point out any specific thing you believe isn’t fact.
I Fully Agree with You.!! Innocent….
Dear RR: I will continue to post rebuttals to your blog post, which should have a disclaimer that it is an OPINION piece, borderline FICTION. My comments will be based upon trial evidence.
“When Richard Lyon first began sneaking poison into his wife’s beverages, he probably hoped she would die quickly and doctors would attribute the tragedy to natural causes, end of story.”
Correction: FROM THE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS: There is no PHYSICAL evidence that directly links Richard to “sneaking poison” into his wife’s beverages. It is all hearsay. Your statement “he probably” is your opinion.
I will follow up with specifics about Dr. Bagheri. Thank you.
You are the one who seems to believe in fiction by defending this scumbag tooth and nails.
First, ALL comments are opinion pieces. That’s what they are. But I notice that you didn’t point out anything specific that was actually incorrect, although you insinuated that the entire comment was fiction. But no, “opinion” doesn’t mean “fiction”. An opinion can contain facts, incorrect information, neither (only opinion, citing no facts at all), or both. But nothing in that comment was fiction:
1) “Vitamins”/capsules that Nancy took contained poison.
2) Documents were forged.
3) Nancy told MULTIPLE, trustworthy witnesses that Richard was trying to poison her.
What part of that is supposedly fiction?
There are at least two separate people to whom the victim told she was poisoned by Richard. One was her psychiatrist/psychologist. Another was the emergency doctor when she was dying. Death bed declarations are not considered hearsay. Personally, I think that any statements given by the victim SHOULD be admitted in court; the defence can attack credibility, just like any other witness.
Otherwise, the murderer benefits from his crime by hiding evidence. Just one of the many things that should be changed in the legal system, in my opinion.
But I have a question: Is the main person of “Friends of Richard Lymon” either:
1) Related to Richard,
2) Richard Lymon’s legal team, or
3) Is or has been, in a romantic/emotionally intimate relationship with Richard Lymon?
And who are you may I ask? On the website, I state very clearly who I am. But you do not state who you are. For all I know, you are a suspect trying to keep all eyes on Richard.
My thoughts, exactly.
C’mon, FRL, you sound like a character from Pilgrim’s Progress who has taken up residence in the Land of Denial.
Of course, it is a shame that most criminals do not make a complete video of all of their activities and instead try to cover up their crimes. Perhaps we should have a new category of “not guilty by reason of successful cover-up.”
And it’s a real shame that good decent people are often the victims of narcissistic creeps.
FRL: It was the poltergeist, then; a stranger; or Nancy herself? It could have been slow suicide – but it would be odd, then, to be complaining for weeks before death of headaches and nausea, never mind that it would be a serious clue that one needed to up the dose, as well as being a severely unpleasant way for a person to take their life. If she were framing the husband, she could have done it rather quicker and hence less painfully. 100 times the normal level of arsenic in her body suggests that much was consumed – but over a long period. If self-inflicted – why? Arsenic kills quickly in sufficient dose. If a third-party, how were they accessing her victuals to administer low-dose poison over weeks?
In my view there is too little doubt to permit acquittal, but I accept that this wasn’t quite a slam-dunk.
Quoting from trial transcripts is all very well – but their content is what convinced the jury. Who cares if ‘There is no PHYSICAL evidence that directly links Richard to “sneaking poison” into his wife’s beverages.’ The truth of that could mean that there was other, more compelling, evidence to convince the jury (As there was). The quantum of circumstantial evidence is persuasive, but you’re implying that such evidence is of less value than physical evidence. If Eve died of poisoning that wasn’t accidental or suicidal – and assuming the absence of a toxic serpent (not that it could cause ingestion poisoning) – it’s safe to assume Adam’s proximity is probative, despite absence of his fingerprints/DNA. If Eve had life insurance in Adam’s favour (or he thought so), and if he were short of money ‘cos of high living, including trying to impress his new girlfriend, with unpaid bills, those are reasonably probative; and unless Eve elaborately set Adam up, a string of witnesses chronicling how they had signed for chemicals addressed to Adam is probative – despite absence of proof that he ordered them. Eve’s belief that he was poisoning her either suggests he may have been (with other circumstantial evidence) or she was framing him. When sufficient circumstantial evidence aggregates, each aspect of which IN ISOLATION can be ‘explained away’ or attract doubt, a threshold is reached which cannot be ignored or explained away in its entirety. QED Adam’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Lyon is guilty of a horrible murder and is fortunate he got life, not death. But we all need friends, and I admire your speaking up for him and putting the case. I hope I would do the same where I perceived a gross miscarriage of justice…
What ?!!
Just because you’re not aware of who the third party might have been means there wasn’t any?! How ridiculous! Good thing you’re not a detective! Or even a cop! And what’s with this Adam and Eve nonsense?! Adam never killed Eve! I’m not saying I think Lyon is innocent but some of your reasoning is absurd! A serpent? Really?!
S: Oh dear, you really miss the point…
1. Occam’s razor (or Ockham’s razor): suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. The one that requires the least speculation is usually better. Another way of stating: the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation. The principle is widely accepted in scientific and legal procedure, being obvious, really…
I didn’t state there couldn’t have been a third-party. Of course there could – but there’s no reason/evidence to suppose it over and above the explanation that Lyon was the perp – so the court didn’t.
2. Adam/Eve: names merely used to illustrate the above principle, not the biblical story, to be taken somehow literally. (The principle, incidentally, accepted by the court: there was no third-party).
Thank you. To answer one of your questions, the bottle of pills was found eight months later! No fingerprints. Amazing that Richard nor the cleaning company did not find them. Everyone had access to the Lyon home immediately after Nancy was admitted to the hospital. Smells of a set up. Ironically, I received an anonymous email asking me to check out Stephanie Bates, the women who “found” the pills, and I have. Can’t find her anywhere. The records for the condo show everyone who had lived there prior to her and after her, but not her. Coincidentally, the condo is owned by a real estate developer who is connected to Trammel Crow. The rich and powerful can accomplish anything they want, even to frame an innocent man.
Curious as to how Richard explains (or explained) the baggie of empty capsules in his apartment?
Samadhi;
Everything Marcus said made sense. He just took the biblical story of Adam & Eve (which pretty much everyone born in Noth America knows), and applied current forensics and common sense to it. But if you weren’t born in North America, which I suspect you weren’t, since you seem mystified by the serpent (not to mention your name placing your birth elsewhere), it would be a confusing argument. The truth is, there is just far too much that can’t be explained away. And their current story of “accidental” death is beyond ridiculous.
Julie,
Your comments to Samadhi are very disparaging and racist. Actually, people all over the world follow this story. Not all people are as closed-minded as you are.
It wasn’t a third party because:
– Richard gave those vitamins (filled with rat poison) to Nancy, and he still had the empty capsules. What POSSIBLE explanation is there for that?
– The supposed third party needed motive AND opportunity. The old boss didn’t have opportunity, and I seriously doubt the brother did either (and the hospital certainly didn’t, based on the current BS FRL is spouting). It’s likely someone in the home.
– Nancy would get sick/notice a bad taste/powder in drinks supplied to her by Richard. And she told at least two people (doctors) that Richard was trying to kill her.
– It was Richard who supplied the bogus/forged receipt showing Nancy buying the arsenic (no one has a motive for that, except Richard).
– There is a paper trail showing Richard as the person who ordered the poisons.
– Not only was Richard the one with actual motive, the fact that they were getting a divorce, then briefly got together before she died, is a VERY common spouse-murders-spouse pattern: a divorce in the works, one spouse sees what it will cost him/her, decides he/she can get more, then asks his/her spouse to try one more time (to stop divorce proceedings), so he/she can clean up as a widow instead. It’s a pretty common pattern.
Marcus: But maybe, just MAYBE, she WAS Looking for Control, and she Maybe Didn’t WANT to commit suicide, but be Sick Enough to bring Richard BACK to her. There was Definitely Reasonable Doubt….
Marcus: http://www.richardlyon.org
FRL: Thanks; I’ll/we’ll read with interest. Indeed – to your reply to my comment.
Marcus “I hope I would do the same where I perceived a gross miscarriage of justice…” I hope you would have someone fight for you or your child if there was a gross miscarriage of justice.
Read: The New York Times: “The Poison is Arsenic and the Suspect is Wood.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/26/us/the-poison-is-arsenic-and-the-suspect-wood.html
I truly believe in Richard Lyon’s innocence, as do many other Australian’s who followed the story.
RR: “A jury convicted him of first-degree murder, and Lyon began a life sentence at the W.F. Ramsey Unit prison farm at the tender age of 34.”
Correction: Richard began his sentence at the Eastham Unit: 2665 Prison Road 1, Lovelady, TX 75851
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ~ John Adams
He began his prison sentence at the Wynne Unit in Huntsville.
Marcus: Thanks. Just put some updated info on website.
Cathy: Thank you: shall read tonight (am in UK so some difference in time!)
No problem. Do you visit the website? Wondered who was from UK. Have people from all over the world. Interesting. I’ve had some people drop me hints/clues. So many people in this day and age afraid to do or say anything. But do I blame them? Look what happened!
Don’t remember using my name.
Cathy: Hello. If I understand you correctly, you’re wondering how I got your name. You posted here in the name of Cathy Hopperstad just above (and on the RL website I see your name is there).
Best wishes,
Marcus
Marcus: No just thinking aloud.
“Don’t remember using my name.”
Oops!
C’mon, FRL. Time to leave the Land of Denial and move to the Land of Reality. No evidence? I realize that some people think you’re innocent unless you leave a full video diary detailing your actions. Invite friends and neighbors over to watch.
Perhaps they need a new plea category. Call it innocent by reason of successful cover-up. But I doubt that that would have succeeded here.
This boy needs to be cooked off
If only Texas and Richard could submit to a polygraph.
Richard passed his polygraph.
Polygraphs are absolutely pointless. I’ve seen many calm killers (and regular people who were lying) who passed, and many worried, freaked out victims who’ve failed. Police should just stop using them. It creates tunnel vision, and isn’t even close to reliable.
I worry about Lyon getting out. Michael Peterson did after only 98.5 months of his “life without parole” sentence. The owl did it. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Peterson_(criminal)#Owl_theory
If Lyon had been a Texan cop, he may have gotten only 20 years for murder as Joseph Kent McGowen did. That murderer is due to get out soon. See https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Rogue-cop-gets-20-years-in-killing-2064331.php
There is still the chance Genene Jones will be released if she is not convicted of another child’s murder.
Texans pride themselves on their tough on crime reputation. My state is only slightly better. Michigan lacks the death penalty but life usually means life without an outright exoneration. Sharee Miller did get a long vacation from her life sentence though (July 29, 2009 to Aug. 2, 2012. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharee_Miller
Texas also has convicted several innocent people though Lyon is not one of these. Christopher Ochoa, Richard Danziger, and Cameron Todd Willingham (although possibly guilty of spousal abuse) come to mind. The last two are interesting in that Willingham was executed and Danziger suffered permanent brain damage in prison due to mistaken identity by another prisoner.
I’ve seen both the Forensic Files and Dominick Dunne (available here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5vYDUYFjqw) episodes on this. The comment at the YouTube site is also good.
Lyon has advocates pushing for his release, although so far, they haven’t had much luck. I remember the Danziger case, too — so incredibly sad.
I suggest you watch, Life After Life, the Michael Morton story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7rEfV67630
Texas is known for its injustice.
Aji Sabaki,
Although I don’t believe for one second that Richard Lyons is innocent (the facts say he’s guilty), the case of Michael Peterson is different. The owl + drugs & wine + Kathleen’s panic may very well be the cause of her death. It seemed implausible to me at first as well, but implausible does happen occasionally. There WERE owl feathers and her own hair found in her hands; what POSSIBLE explanation is there for that, other than an owl attack? And the wounds DO look exactly like owl attack wounds – I looked up pictures of other cases. Look it up. Owls HAVE attacked, and just because it’s bizarre, combined with a past that made him look guilty, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. For example, I was once in an elevator that dropped 8 1/2 floors. I was only saved by the emergency brakes which stopped me between the first floor and the basement. Since then, I’ve been stuck in elevators 5 more times (a different building), although I know how to get out myself, from that first time. But most people have NEVER been stuck in an elevator. That I have been 6 times is implausable, yet true. I’ve also, strangely, escaped death a number of times: elevator drop, severe car accident (caused permanent pain), house fire, drowning when I was a kid (saved by a lifeguard; lifeguards, which the beach no longer has – caused by frivolous lawsuits) … It’s strange, but it happened. I’ve also had a lot of death around me. My mom, my dad, my stepfather, all my grandparents, my ex’s mother, my friends siblings. In fact, someone died in my high school every, single year I went there. More than one some years. It’s bizarre, and if anyone ever suspected me of murder, it may look bad (they had nothing to do with me). But it was a bizarre coincidence.
Unfortunately, the cops just made a joke out of the owl theory (I guess they haven’t learned that implausible DOES happen), but give me one other explanation for owl feathers and her own hair being found in her hand????? When you look at the FACTS, I can’t think of any reason for this, other than an owl attack, which DOES happen; maybe the owl had just laid eggs. We won’t know because the police never looked for an owl’s nest. It was all a big joke to them. They even put a picture of an owl on an FBI’s most wanted poster. Ha, ha, ha. But, tell me: Why else was she clasping owl feathers and her own hair in her hand??? I can only think of one plausible reason, and I think this poor guy may have gone to jail, right after losing his wife, for something he didn’t do. Either way, I don’t think he’s a threat to anyone anymore.
He will never be released. Slither back into your holes, snakes. Maybe devote your energy in volunteering for needy children and adults … people who matter.
Lyon will never be paroled as long as he refuses to take responsibility for the death of Nancy Dillard. His counter theory that Nancy was poisoned by arsenic while building a play house made of CCA-treated lumber is absurd, as surely their children would have been sickened, among other things.
Lyons claims that his absence from the home on the day his wife became seriously ill is his “alibi,” when in fact he might have added poison to any one of numerous substances in the house that his wife could have ingested.
Even a cursory reading of his support materials makes it obvious why none of the innocence projects will take his case.
Leslie,
Agreed.
Julie W
Anonymous and Leslie,
Firstly, it is difficult to take responsibility for an action that you did not do. He is innocent. It isn’t absurd about the arsenic poisoning. Read the article under Nancy Dillard Lyon on the website. If no one else touched it, they wouldn’t have been exposed and it explains the high dosage on her fingertips.
Try to do more than a cursory reading. The problem is that this ridiculous narrative has been spread in writings, TV shows, and books. The powerful family had to make someone responsible and answer for it, and as always, TX seems to look at the spouse. Moreover, the hospital was grossly negligent. TX is an embarrassment when it comes to justice for its citizens. he highest exoneration rate in the country. Why is the TX justice system so worried about finding out the truth? Michael Morten’s case is probably the best example.
Richard deserves to be paroled and returned to CT to his family, or what is left of it. But more importantly, he deserves a new trial. The problem is the cost of the trial and the fact that Texans have made Richard into a monster and Nancy into a saint makes it difficult for anyone to take the case. More importantly, someone seems to put an awful lot of pressure on people to not take the case or talk about it. It would be the kiss of death for anyone in TX to take this case – that is what some have told me. I think William Dillard Jr. has a lot to do with it. The truth will eventually come out.
As a mother of a son, this case and others are examples of how the rich can control the justice system. Without money, there is no justice. For all of you so critical and wishing him harm, I pray that God opens your eyes and heart.
Friends of Richard Lyons aka Cathy,
You are a fool. Anyone who says outright that someone is innocent, who wasn’t with that person every second (basically, a conjoined twin), is a fool. The same is true of saying he’s absolutely guilty, convicted or not. That’s why I always say, “I believe,” or “the facts point to his guilt.” It is unreasonable to think that the children would have never been around while their mother made their playhouse (BTW, did tests ever even show arsenic in the wood? And who provided the wood?
Any illness there? I doubt very much, that she ate the wood), and either way, it doesn’t explain the “vitamins” filled with poison, or the empty capsules matching those vitamins in Richard’s apartment, or the fact that Nancy thought he was trying to poison her, or the strange powder she found floating in a drink HE gave her. Or the forged receipt with her name on it (typed receipt, but all receipts in that business were done by hand – no typewriter), or the forged diary entries. In fact, there’s a LOT of evidence without even approaching the motive. How does all that coincide with your accidental death theory??? And Leslie is correct. He’ll never be released until he admits killing her. That’s how it works. You have to show remorse. There’s always SOME person that stands by the killer, especially one that cleans up nice. So it is sadly predictable. You have a relationship with him, don’t you? And this website/belief/him takes up a very large part of your life, doesn’t it? I can tell. If you continue like this, one day you will look back on your life and realize you wasted a large part of your life on a killer (as the evidence shows). Either way, you’re wasting your life on something that won’t change. Probation is only given once the person admits guilt and shows remorse.
My relationship with Richard is one of a fellow Catholic. I wish I had more time and money to pursue his innocence, but I do not. The truth will come out; however, due to blog posts like these and series like Forensic Files, it makes it more difficult. But I have faith.
Charles Couch lied under oath and by the way, did any of you see this? A real trustworthy man. He was paid off to lie to protect his own skin and to secure the prosecution’s case, something even A.W. Gray alluded to. Bill Jr and Nancy were friends with this man. Someone needs to do some real investigative reporting.
Despite Multiple Warnings Charles Couch, Alleged Oil And Gas Con Man Is Allowed To Skip The Country Colt Ledger & Associates Inc. is the private investigation firm in USA. It investigates oil and gas.
BriefingWire.com, 12/16/2016 – Dallas, Texas. The SEC brought a successful multiple securities violations lawsuit against Charles O. Couch, in June, 2016, when Charles Couch agreed to pay $10,000,000 to the SEC and some of his hundreds of victims. This action would have never occurred without the intervention of, at least, one United States Senator and a retired Texas representative, to move the complaint from the bumbling Texas State Securities Board’s Enforcement Director, Joe Rotunda. The complaint had sat in the Dallas Field Office, with the fully knowledge and support of Commissioner John Morgan, Deputy Commissioner Ronak Patel and the entire politically appointed State Securities Board for over 2.5 years, untouched.
The SEC moved rapidly and filed their suit in early 2014. Charles Couch, the owner of Couch Oil and Gas, located in Dallas, Texas who has had multiple documented criminal fraud and money laundering complaints filed against him, has apparently, left the country for Ghana Africa, despite multiple warnings by those keenly observing Couch’s divestment of investor owned assets, movement of large sums of money and the creation of an alleged fraud involving gold mining in Ghana.
Colt Ledger said in response to Couch’s departure that he was not surprised by Couch’s much anticipated departure. “After being treated as Royalty by Texas Securities’ top enforcement dog, Joe Rotunda and the lose way in which the law suit was handled by the SEC, the only thing that might come as a surprise is that Joe (Rotunda) and Jay (Oman, Deputy Director of Enforcement) did not give Couch a ride to the airport.”
“One of our clients, I understand, made repeated request to both agencies to seize or freeze Couch’s assets, to stop the selloff of investor’s assets and take measures to prevent his leaving the country. All requests were flippantly dismissed and Charles Couch now sets beyond the reach of American justice complements of Joe Rotunda, Texas Securities’ Enforcement Division, the Texas State Securities Board and the SEC.”
“When you consider that the Texas Securities Enforcement Division with 6 regional offices and 100 staffers but can only eek out 13.5 civil and criminal enforcement actions per year, in the World’s epicenter of oil and gas fraud, it becomes quite clear that there is either mass corruption or/and or mass incompetence permeating the Texas State Securities Board. We have a press release coming soon dealing involving my dealing with the legendary Texas Rangers on the subject of corruption v incompetence at the TSSB.”
To reiterate, the autopsy report said an acute dose of arsenic as cause of death. There was no proof that Richard had any arsenic, Nancy had no arsenic in her stomach, there was no arsenic found in any of the food or in the house, the pill bottles did not contain poison nor Richard’s fingerprints, and they were found over six months after Richard left the condo (which the police had access to) and the condo was owned by a friend of Tramwell Crowe. The woman who rented the condo cannot be located – a tip off that she was paid off.
He will never say he is guilty because he is not. Again, the truth will come out. I spend my time in prayer for those in need and for truth. Not a waste of time. More people need to so that.
Who told you he was innocent? Elvis? Cause that’s not what he told me. I saw him yesterday.
The Loch Ness monster told me.
William Dillard, Jr. and his wife Mary Helen raised Anna and Allison. Anna is now a dentist in the Dallas area.
That’s so great to hear — thanks so much for writing in!
I thinking it’S obvious he killed her..What about the pills found at that rented flat? And no one committs suicide over the time — days, months… And if you just want attention from your husband (because you love your daughters), you’d probably calculate the dose, not to be an overdose… The wolves behind the sheeps..
Something looking obvious doesn’t make it true! People should have learned that by now! I’m not saying that I think he’s innocent, I don’t really know for sure. I watched the Sandra Locke made-for-tv movie recently. Not a very well-made movie. The movie made it look like he could be either innocent or guilty. Inconclusive. You also said no one commits suicide over time. That’s a ridiculous statement. Obviously people commit suicide over time. They want to die but don’t want to kill themselves outright. That’s just a statement that you made up off the top of your head with no basis in reality at all. And probably calculate the dose?! No one ever made mistakes on dosages?! What planet did you just arrive from?! Like I said, I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty, but a lot of you people commenting on here make ridiculous statements that obviously don’t prove that he’s guilty and really just add more nonsense to the mix.
S: The jury found it implausible that Nancy would choose to die a protracted, painful death (who would, knowing that having given yourself the chance to change your mind, you’d done serious permanent damage to yourself?) It’s just conceivable that you could hate someone enough to poison yourself purely to frame them, at the expense of your own life, but it’s barely likely. There was no evidence she was suicidal; she had children whom she loved, and hatred for Richard wasn’t articulated. This scenario was found less likely than that she was poisoned – which is reasonable and with which I agree.
This was not a ‘slam-dunk’ but was the most likely of all the explanations, which the court found so likely as to reach the threshold of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. There can be SOME doubt , which is by definition unreasonable in compromising the reasonableness of the finding. If Richard didn’t do it, he fatally weakened his case by lying and forgery. Per se they don’t amount to guilt, but a jury will aways ask why they were engaged in… (One reason might be to strengthen genuine innocence post hoc that one fears will be insufficiently compelling – but an intelligent man such as this would have to be extremely foolish to forge ‘evidence’ and to have thought he could get away with it. Again, it’s impalusible).
He did not lie or forge anything. Look up the credibility of Charles Couch and in the trial transcripts he miraculous comes to this conclusion that the invoice was fake after the DA’s office talked to him the night before. Coercion much?
Gabyfromargentina,
If you just wanted attention from your husband, you wouldn’t use arsenic at all, since it causes permanent damage. If she wanted to kill herself and frame him, she’d use one huge dose, and those forged diary entries and the forged arsenic receipt wouldn’t exist. No other reason fits everything. The evidence clearly shows he killed her. His GF/friend is just pointing to anything/everything else to use as a smokescreen.
That’s assuming Cathy is a real person, and not Richard himself. But I wouldn’t be surprised if he has some fool acting on his behalf. There’s always someone.
I was a patient at Dallas Presbyterian who was poisoned with arsenic. The doctors there refused to acknowledge the poisoning because it would involve litigation. I feel sorry that Nancy was not treated properly. If there is a guilty party here, it is the hospital.
So sorry to hear you were made ill, Lili. Thanks for writing in — I had never heard that theory.
Thank you for your testimony! There have been many cases attributed to that hospital. You are absolutely correct.
Friends: I’ve done an (inexhaustive) internet search for “dallas presbyterian hospital arsenic” and “dallas presbyterian hospital poisoning.” Only the Lyon case shows. Surely if the hospital was connected with institutional accidental or deliberate poisonings, this would have been reported in the media?
Lili’s presumed (because ambiguous) claim is far too tenuous as it stands to mean anything (see the questions I ask). Maybe “The doctors there refused to acknowledge the poisoning because…” it was a fantasy, self-administered due to mental illness, or a myriad other possibilities.
Lili: How terrible that you were poisoned, and I hope you have properly recovered. You imply it was deliberate. Surely the only role of the hospital would be to certify that you had been poisoned? Whether it was deliberate, and by whom, is a matter for the police and prosecuting authority, so why would the hospital be involved in litigation (unless you imply that the hospital was medically incompetent and you wished to sue it)?
Lili: I now gather you claim it was the hospital who (presumably unintentionally) poisoned you. This was unclear from your post. I imagine that if you had evidence that you ingested arsenic at the hospital, and not prior to admission, the police would investigate the hospital. If there are any others cases like yours, that could be evidence… Rogue staff have certainly been known to poison patients. But what makes you suspicious that you were poisoned at the hospital and not before? Were you admitted WITH arsenical poisoning (in which case, they didn’t) or with another condition, THEN were also to have been found poisoned? Did the hospital find arsenical poisoning or is that your own diagnosis? If the hospital did, I believe they are legally required to notify the police: they cannot avoid this if they may be the origin of the poisoning.
Lots of questions here which render your claim perplexing…
The hospital did not poison but failed to test for it immediately. In Richard’s case, the hospital gave Nancy a medication they knew she was allergic to, which caused other complications as well as other damage. IF Nancy told the doctor she thought her husband was poisoning her, then why didn’t he call the police and test her for it?
The hospital has to be proven negligent but if they are not forthright then it takes a lot of power and money to sue. It will eventually all come out.
Friends: Many thanks. I knew you weren’t claiming the hos was responsible for the poisoning (though Lili may be); rather that they were negligent.
“IF Nancy told the doctor she thought her husband was poisoning her, then why didn’t he call the police and test her for it?” I’d have thought there should be a protocol about this but can imagine there isn’t or wasn’t (ie, it may not be that uncommon that people sick with potentially substance-attributable symptoms wrongly claim they’ve been poisoned by another). However, if Nancy presented as rational AND poisoning was suspected, or, certainly, found, by the examining dr, I think the police should have been contacted. You say she wasn’t tested – but she’s likely to have exhibited poisoning symptoms, and that should have caused concern. If I were a dr, a patient saw me claiming to be poisoned by another, and she showed signs of toxicity, I’d want to be on the safe side and contact police.
So, perhaps the hospital was negligent, though of course it leaves us with question of the poisoner’s identity… If the above is correct, Nancy’s family would seem justified in litigating.
She wasn’t poisoned by anyone. She came in contact with wet, burnt, pressure treated wood.
Friends: … As in this case, you suggest:
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/26/us/the-poison-is-arsenic-and-the-suspect-wood.html
FRL,
The hospital may very well have been negligent; it wouldn’t be the first time. Many doctors discount what their patients say, and hospital staff are often overworked with little sleep. But what does any of that have to do with the intentional murder, which clearly happened BEFORE she entered the hospital? What does that have to do with the poison pills given to Nancy, the empty capsules matching those pills in Richard’s apartment, or the forged documents (fake receipt and diary entries) found to be in Richard’s handwriting?
Well, I myself do not know definitively what happened to Nancy Dillard Lyons. That said, let’s review a few facts that Lyon has not refuted.
1) While at college, Richard had Nancy write some of his assignments.
2) While married, Richard had an ongoing affair.
3) Richard’s handwriting was identified by a forensic expert in Nancy’s diary accusing her brother of sexually abusing her.
From these three facts, we can ascertain that Richard does not have integrity, loyalty, morals, scruples or decency. Granted, that makes him a disgusting person but not necessarily a murderer. I feel he is smart enough to find bored and lonely sycophants to engage in defending him when even FIVE legal services that offer assistance to unjustly convicted prisoners have declined to take on his case. So, Richard has fans, people writing or calling or visiting him from the FRL. He has something to work towards, something to aspire to, something to live for, plus think of all the attention he gets (the FRL writer here must have nothing but time on her hands to dedicate herself to this project with such prolific efforts). I bet someone puts money in his commissary account and writes letters to anyone and everyone to plead his case. Good for him. Sweet set-up. Must make time go by quicker than it normally would behind bars. A shame about his wife though.
‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
40“And the King will say, ‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me!’
Maybe if more people spent their free time helping others, the world would be a better place.
Richard did not need Nancy’s help at Harvard. Richard was admitted on his own merits whereas Nancy was declined admission and then her father had to intervene.
Richard never denied the affair and has done his penance for it.
In Richard’s appeal for a new trial, which was denied, it would have proven the hand writing expert wrong.
Without DNA evidence, it is difficult to get acceptance from an innocence project. The costs for a case like this is too much for them to handle and risk.
Juries have been wrong. Politics, power, and money will do what is necessary to influence the outcome of any situation. TX is not known for its stellar justice system.
Nancy’s death was a tragedy all the way around and has affected many lives. What is not helpful to all affected parties is sites like this one.
You are making all these statements about him that you believe are facts. Told to you by him? While the rest of us have the opinion he is guilty. Based on his trial.
Alice: “From these three facts, we can ascertain that Richard does not have integrity, loyalty, morals, scruples or decency. Granted, that makes him a disgusting person but not necessarily a murderer.”
No, we can’t. The assignments thing’s a non-event: plenty of college kids ‘cheat.’ Plenty of husbands cheat via affairs. And it’s unclear what interpretation to make of the falsified diary entry. These facts don’t constitute a ‘dangerously’ unscrupulous person and aren’t probative of murder. They merely suggest a person capable of cheating – in the first two citations of the kind that millions do. They MAY make his attempt to cheat the law by murder a little more plausible, but you press them too much.
More significant is that (or if) five ‘false conviction’ charities/services have examined his case and refused it – particularly if they have stated that it’s because they think the outcome correct. But there’s a caveat: POSSIBLY they think he has SOME case but that it’s weaker than other cases and they have to prioritise them, rather than that there is no merit in his claim. I’m not suggesting this is so – simply that interpretation rather than assumption should be made. If they DID declare there was no merit, of course that severely weakens innocence claim.
“Sweet deal”? Imagine if you were an innocent man who has spent 27 years in prison. Nothing sweet about that deal.
Richard Lying is not getting out ever hahahaha
justice served
Justice is not served when the powerful can corrupt the system. Many examples of such, especially in TX.
L. Alice,
Agreed. And let’s not forget the poison-filled capsules Nancy had, or the matching empty capsules found in his apartment! Or the forged receipt, or the life insurance he thought he was going to get…
Ladies, if you think your husband is trying to kill you (or husbands who think their wives are trying to kill them), make sure you tell your spouse that you changed your life insurance and/or will . . . AFTER you’ve done it.
I watched Richard cry as the letter was read. I will never believe, as some suggested, that his tears were just a ploy to win the jury’s sentiments. But I could feel my focus changing. I no longer wondered if he had killed her. I wondered, instead, what twisted passion had carried him through the months of premeditation, through the hours of her retching at home, through the days of her decline and death. I cannot pretend to know what happened between Richard and Nancy, but I believed then, as now, that Richard loved her once — as deeply as he must have grown to hate her.
I can understand how a friend or family member can believe their loved one is innocent. I But there are facts to this case that just add up to Richard Lyon being guilty.
As for the NY Times article about the arsenic in the wood, both the wife and the husband in that article had high arsenic levels. If wood was the cause why wasn’t Richard found with any arsenic in his body?
In my opinion (this is an opinion), Richard is guilty, based on the facts that I am aware of from the trial transcripts and the evidence presented. Forensic Files, in my opinion, got it right.
And RR – you do an amazing job on this website/blog. Do not listen to others who have ulterior motives or derogatory speech. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but please don’t let that stop you!
Tim: Yours was the opinion of the jury – so you hardly need to be sheepish about it! It’s why we might DISAGREE with the jury that we’re more controversial – and such opinion comes with the caveat that they heard (and saw) the evidence – not us – so, other things being equal, they’re more likely to be correct. We know that juries get it wrong – perhaps there’s a figure for what proportion of convictions have subsequently been proved unfounded – but because of the high threshold of certitude to convict, more are likely wrong in acquitting than convicting (which is as it should be).
For these reasons I’m cautious in averring that the jury was wrong – particularly in the many cases on this site that have been through at least one appeal with the same conclusion. As a police rep on one FF ep commented of a conviction the case of which was re-tried, resulting in acquittal, said: “What do you say? The system didn’t work, or it did work?”
The difficulty supporters of those they claim are wrongly convicted have is that they are usually, understandably, close to the convict, motivated by bonds of love and affection to support their claimed innocence. Precisely because of that, those further removed from the case claim they lack objectivity. BUT if it weren’t for those supporters (who were correct), would some of those whose convictions were overturned have remained convicts and perhaps have been executed? Perhaps others can cite examples…
The BEST example is Michael Morton https://www.innocenceproject.org/cases/michael-morton/.
I agree. One begins as just reaching out to a convict, and then when one begins to review the case, it become questionable. Not all cases are such.
Post jury interviews revealed that they were on the verge of acquittal but the Couch testimony and hand writing testimony swayed them. Without going further, there are questions regarding both of those pieces to include the actions of the DA.
We shall see!
Cathy: Thanks – I’ll read.
I should’ve added above that of course juries can and should only judge on the evidence presented to them, rather than adding their own second-guesses, prejudices etc to the mix. Here in UK judges routinely remind juries of this at the ouset; perhaps US judges do too. But ‘if junk’s put it, you get junk out’… One FF ep showed that ‘junk science’ and prosecutorial failure to disclose exculpatory evidence caused wrongful conviction. If juries are presented with partial or misleading ‘evidence’ (which could be more accident than design – such as failure of the defence to do a reasonable job of interrogating evidence), the wrong outcome’s very possible.
It’s no consolation to the wrongly convicted that more of the guilty go free than vice-versa…
Cathy: Just read the case. That poor man. What is most disgraceful is the withholding of exculpatory evidence – and the absurd 10-day prison sentence of the prosecutor found guilty of malfeasance. Where it is shown that prosecutors have materially contributed – and certainly likely caused – wrongful conviction, they should be sentenced to a proportion of the sentence their victims received, in my view. Their is considerable concern that prosecutors are almost insulated from their misconduct.
I don’t include in this fighting hard for their case, regardless of their view of guilt or innocence: I demure somewhat from the notion that counsel is strictly about establishing truth, which is properly a matter for the jury; but there can be no latitude where concealment of evidence helpful to the defence is concerned (Brady doctrine). And how a lawyer could have on his conscience that someone was imprisoned possibly, probably or certainly because of his ambition improperly to win his case is beyond me. Such people are unfit for office and should be punished just as they have tried improperly to punish others – with prison.
Marcus,
Thanks for reading about the Michael Morton case. Unbelievable, isn’t it?
Marcus,
I do believe Richard killed his wife. I don’t agree that, in the USA, juries are more likely to wrongfully acquit than convict. I have watched MANY juries convict for murder on VERY little evidence. Sometimes, the fact that they have been murdered at all isn’t even proven, but the defendant is a very arrogant and unlikable man, and that’s enough. Juries lean towards conviction, they do not assume innocence as they are supposed to. I believe they definitely got it right in this case, but how many times have you heard people say, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. He MUST have done SOMETHING for the police to be looking at him,” sometimes before the person is even charged? Juries, and people in general, often give DAs and the police, benefit of the doubt.
Then, there’s double jeopardy. A right in the USA that needs to be changed. Even if irrefutable evidence comes to light after he/she is acquitted, that person can never be charged again! Even if they ADMIT to the murder, write a book about how he got away with it, or show police where the damn body is! Does that make sense to ANYONE?!? But, because of that law/so-called right, juries don’t want to risk acquitting someone unless they are sure, because there’s no way to fix it. I understand their concern. Personally, I’d probably force a mistrial, as I care far more for real justice, than the law. At least, they assume, a convicted person has appeals.
Often, a hunch/bad feeling about the defendant wins out over lack of evidence. That law/right has ended up causing a lot of innocent people to end up in jail in that country, along with the beyond foolish war on drugs, which have put a lot of innocent mothers, wives, and girlfriends to end up in jail for longer than the actual drug dealers (I’m talking about 20 year mandatory sentences, mandatory sentences for anything is foolish – there are always exceptions)!!!
Anyway, I don’t agree with you regarding juries. At least in the USA. There are far too many crooked DAs and crooked cops. Cops, who just want to close their case, regardless if the defendant is guilty (but there are good, hard working cops too), and crooked DAs who just want to get ahead. All they care about is winning the case to keep up their win/lose ratio, and advance their career. Who cares if he/she is innocent? Of course, I have seen some DA’s who do care if the defendant is innocent. But judging on how often I’ve seen DAs fight AGAINST releasing innocent people who have been wrongfully convicted, there is something VERY wrong in that system, and those are the prosecutors who get ahead to become equally crooked judges. The justice system in the USA is broken. Besides, you should NEVER believe something because someone else may believe it. You have to look at the evidence.
Julie: I certainly don’t think US juries are more likely wrongfully to convict than others’ juries: that would be hard to evidence and I wouldn’t presume to speculate, except to use the countries’ own stats for wrongful conviction. If what you think about juries is correct, it’s a travesty. But I’m not as pessimistic as you that they’re composed of such fools… What would you have instead? That’s the problem… Perhaps you’re implying that too many Americans are stupid, so unfit to serve. That would appear to be a problem with schooling. But insofar as stupid people get a vote, need representing, and should themselves represent their own ‘stupid’ stratum or community of US citizens, it’s still unclear why they shouldn’t serve on juries…
Of course, double jeopardy is in the Fifth Amendment – and the Constitution isn’t debatable! In England the protection against double jeopardy was considered a universal maxim of common law, but the English double jeopardy doctrine was extremely narrow. It afforded protection only to defendants accused of capital felonies and applied only after conviction or acquittal.
The American colonists were intimately familiar with English law and its principles were often quoted by the colonists in support of their claims that Parliament was exceeding its lawful authority… and we know what that brought about!
The colonists were also familiar with how narrowly the right against double jeopardy had been defined in England and sought to enlarge the definition by making the right against double jeopardy applicable to all crimes not just capital felonies.
The above very briefly explains something of why the US has this principle – though it can’t justify it, which is a different question!
Tim, thanks so much for the kind words about the blog!
Interesting that the “Friends of Richard Lyon” (https://www.richardlyon.org/) website now shows that the website has expired. I wonder if they’ve given up the fight or if it’s just an oversight?
Jeannie or Tim?
It is being revised and will be back up by spring.
Also, people, please stop posting about the Allison and Anna. They would like their privacy and to be left alone.. Can you imagine their pain? If so, you would leave them alone.
Thank you.
Guess the daughters, Anna and Allison really do wish to be left alone: neither one appears to support FORL/Cathy in their father’s conspiracy-steeped “innocence.” Neither does the Innocence Project.
My husband was friends with this guy in prison. Says he was a model prisoner. Sent him some dip on MKJ day when he was put in solitary one time. My husband had read the book before he had ever met him.
As a ‘white-collar’ inmate this is to be expected. I imagine the prison’s low-medium security.
Correction: I noticed that FRL was responding to a different comment (not mine), when calling it fiction, but otherwise, my comment stands as is.
Ridiculous: it’s hardly racist to suggest that mere suggesting cultural ignorance is racist, nor that that may be because the ignorance is a function of another race or nationality, as was argued. Actually, Samadhi was pretty disparaging of my post – something you don’t, equally, object to, plainly because I’m not arguing in your favour (though the argument I offer, whether comprehended or not, is certainly not controversial, being widely accepted in discussion of evidence, theory of knowledge etc).
You’re as bad as the p.o.s. who killed her if you believe that. The fake invoice for arsenic, the movie incident where he was upset because she wouldn’t drink the soda (who gets upset about something like that?) – he even lied to his mistress saying Nancy had a rare blood disorder (why the f**k would he need to lie about that?). But he’s innocent?!? Go to hell, and while on the way there ask him to mix up a drink for you.
Friends of Richard Lyon should spend their time being Friends of Anna and Allison instead. Funny how people can put all their energy and concern into the guilty and never show any real concern for the true victims.
The “Friends of Richard Lyon” website was proven to be a money-making scam.
It no longer exists.
Friends of Richard Lyon are hardly friends of justice. I’d like to know where Peter Munsch got his info.
Looks like the “friend” also ran for public office in 2020 and lost. Wonder if anybody in CT connected the dots. I sure wouldn’t want the “friend” representing me.
Quick trial.
Short time for jury to make a decision.
Some facts raise concerns about reasonable doubt.
One could wonder about the so called experts evidence in view of the high profile and influence of the victim’s family in the city.
Seems like nothing much has changed in Dallas since November 1963.
No winners in this case. Very sad.
Friends of Richard “DICK” Lyon should work DC or Marvel. As we seen many times. A LOT of moronic jurors out there and guilty people go free and sadly innocent people go to prison. This is not the case with Richard Lyon. You got the nerve to use the word “fiction”? Lol. He told the woman he was cheating on her with that his wife had a sickness. That alone says it all and yes read about many times. Quit telling people to go to your dumbass website. There are 100 others that say a different story. Sa
Richard Liar (-yon)
This murderous scumbag should NEVER be granted parole. He deserves to die alone in his cell.
I was in the waiting room for ICU at Presbyterian Hospital when Nancy was admitted to the hospital in 1991. My aunt was in ICU at the time and that’s why I was there.
Something just didn’t seem right watching the family as they gathered.
It was almost an SMU tailgate party as they brought in catering and Bloody Marys to wait for Nancy’s recovery.
My belief is that she committed suicide and framed her husband so he wouldn’t be able to get custody of their children.
30 years later I still maintain this belief. I cannot believe he killed her.
Is Richard Lyon still in prison and do his daughters visit him?
Is there a link to read about him in prison?
Richard Lyon was denied parole again on March 1, 2021. His next parole date is in 2026. https://inmate.tdcj.texas.gov/InmateSearch/reviewDetail.action?sid=04503067&tdcj=00612188&fullName=LYON%2CRICHARD+ALAN+ABOOD
Thanks for sending the link! Very glad to hear he’s still behind razor wire.
THANK YOU!!!! And Thank God. May he never walk free again.
Anyone who has ever spent hours and nights heaving over a toilet with wretched upheavels and cramping knows that no one would choose this method of suicide…..
I was a 15 year old working in the lawn and garden section of a Target-like store in the midwest and I was starving halfway into my shift…. Nothing to eat there but I eyed the corn seeds and I nibbled a bag of the dried dessicated (arsenic-treated) kernals. That night and nights following were over that porcelain bowl turning myself inside out – but because I did not pay for that packet I did not confess. I have gut problems to this day; 50+ years later and I spend many nights in the late hours with an upheaval…not a fun thing but nothing like that sick poisoned feeling….and I know mine was a mere dusting of what that poor woman went through. He is a monster and I hope he never sees freedom. I came here tonight to see if anyone knows about the 2021 parole…..
A live dog is better than a dead lion.