A Theory can convict?

I have been following the Ryan Widmer case since it first broke. I have attended the trial and read every article written and re-read the live blog as well. In my opinion, Mr. Ryan Widmer was the victim of wrong place, wrong time. He was convicted of Murder by a jury of his peers who claimed they went over every detail and every piece of evidence only to come up with their own theory as to how Mr. Widmer supposedly drown his wife. Pure speculation. I am going to REFUTE everything and offer my own theory as to what happened since the theories are flying and that is what ultimately convicted him which I believe is Miscarriage of justice.

Let's start with  the 911 call. The dispatcher testified that Mr. Widmer seemed too calm. The prosecution also hammered that in and even went as far as saying it was basically "staged". I also listened to the 911 call and in my opinion Mr. Widmer seemed genuinely frightened and upset. I did not feel the call was staged and his actions were quite normal. I Also noted the Dispatcher testified that he usually can't even get an address out of callers. If you listen to the call again, everyone must have failed to hear that he couldn't get Mr. Widmer's address and specifically asks him to "CALM DOWN".  Mr. Widmer does exactly what the dispatcher tells him to do, he calms down and offers information to help. I'm not sure why people find this to be "unusual". The dispatcher continues to ask useless questions and even asks if Mr. Widmer is her MOTHER. In my opinion, after Mr. Widmer said "My wife fell asleep in the bath tub and I think she's dead", the dispatcher should have immediately asked where she was and instructed him what to do at that very moment instead of wasting precious time. There was a few seconds of dead air after collecting information that he already has access too. Doesn't every second count? Mr. Widmer follows all of his instructions. To say Mr. Widmer "staged" this call is unbelievable and the prosecution's opinion. Somehow their opinion came to life and no one hears the distress in Mr. Widmer's voice, his cooperation and his cries to his wife to breath. The dispatcher tells him to start CPR knowing full well that Mr. Widmer told him, "What little I know". Why doesn't he properly instruct him at that moment? Better yet, why didn't he instruct him as soon as the call was placed?

Let's move on... The first arrived (Bishop) testified he noticed no signs of struggle, drugs, or markings on Ryan and that he was wearing boxers. Did he touch him? How did he know he was dry? Now Stephens testifies. No signs of trauma on Sarah's body. Had difficulty intubating because of vomit in her throat. Her hair was damp, not dripping wet. (Keep in mind her hair has been out of the water since he drained the tub just before the 911 call, and hair that has not been trimmed dries faster because of the dead ends) Skin on her body not wet. She's been out of water since he drained the tub, her body had time to air dry between then and the CPR efforts. If  Stephens testified that Sarah was dead from an EKG at the ambulance, then why did they continue trying to revive her?

Dr. Aneese of course testifies that it's impossible to fall asleep and drown. Dr. Warner Spitz testified that once you inhale a large amount of water, the drowning process begins and it's almost impossible to stop. So in theory (here comes another theory) if Sarah fell asleep and went below the surface, she could have awakened as she slipped below the surface, panicked and inhaled a large amount of water which rendered her unable to cough it up or yell for help.

She also testifies no family history of heart problems, etc. etc. Rittgers cross examins, shows a book that states epilepsy can cause sudden and unexplained death in several ways. Loss of consciousness and muscle control permits incidents such as drowning. Das agreed. So a first time seizure could have rendered Sarah paralyzed as she slipped under the water. Just another theory. (sarcasm at it's best) Funny how the prosecution objected when Defense asks if a person could be "scared to death" if  awakened in water then drowning. Why object? 

Routine exam confirmed Sarah complained about feeling tired all the time, and sleeps during the day. Her physician basically ignored it and did not refer to a specialist. Later in the trial, friends testify that Sarah fell asleep at Tailgating parties, Bars where bands were playing, in her care before work and during lunch. Please do not tell me that is normal for a 24 year old seemingly health woman. 

Marcus, ER Physician noted she was "dusky" when arrived, meaning lack of oxygen, inserted IV, intubated her with no problem. Testified about a lot of bloody fluid suctioned from her nose. Said the amount was unusual. Lets think about this. Didn't they say there was vomit in her throat and that is why the EMTs had trouble intubating her in the first place? How many times did they try and fail? She did have fluid in her lungs, manner of death was drowning. Nurse Costello testifies to attempts at reviving Sarah. Notes she asks Mr. Widmer if she was face up or face down several times. He says face up. So this is conflicting with the 911 call. Could it be that this man is possibly in a state of shock after finding his wife submerged in a tub and watching paramedics forcefully trying to revive her. It was noted in testimony that the CPR attempts were aggressive. Imagine watching someone slamming your loved one's chest and shoving large metal objects down their throat as you stand by helpless.

Burke shows up and talks with  medics that say body dry, no pruning. It takes a good 1/2 hour for my fingers to prune. I believe everyone is different, some skin is tougher then others. He bagged her hands for evidence (NOTHING was found, by the way) her fingernails completely in tact and and no signs of bruising on forearms, shins, knees. Burke questioned Mr. Widmer at an inappropriate time. He should have given him some time to calm down. He was traumatized. You don't think clearly in a situation like that. Mr. Widmer immediately consented to a search warrant when asked. (nothing to hide) Burke noted no physical markings on Sarah but that a victim might not be able to defend if attacked from behind. I OBJECT! If anyone attacks me from any angle, I could get at least one scratch or bruise in, guaranteed. Burke attempts to say that Mr. Widmer stories conflict about draining the water and taking the body out. Mr. Widmer is under duress. He just watched his wife of only 4 months die in a very traumatizing manner. Do you really think he is thinking clearly?

Becker is one of the dentists Sarah worked for. The testimony provided was nothing alarming although the prosecution made a big deal about it. Said Sarah inquired about life insurance, said Mr. Widmer was pressuring. I know I was pressured about benefits when  I got married. Seemed normal to me. Testified that Sarah complained about smoking and kegerator. What women doesn't complain about drinking. I thought that was a normal marital complaint.

Annette Davis, forensic scientist. Testified she tested carpet that blood had soaked through indicating water was present! Imagine that! I thought they said everything was DRY. Could she have possibly been wet then air dried before first response got there? OH. I forgot to mention, the blood was deluted. BY WATER. I guess that means something was wet, right? Blood and fecal matter found in bedroom. Don't we start to pass fecal matter as we are dying?

William Hilliard, criminalist. Testified he found hand smears going down into the tub and Male handprints. I would assume they both use the tub or shower. The smears and prints could not be dated. I sometimes put my hands on inside while cleaning the tub and my hand slides on occasion. Oh, by the way, the prosecution tried to say that Mr. Widmer tried to use a clorox wipe to wipe down the tub, it was tested by Davis. No blood found. Now come on, if he wiped down the tub, how did they find prints? Hilliard also mentions the arm prints are male. Gee, could Mr. Widmer have possibly rubbed his arm on the tub as he was trying to wrap his arms around his wife to remove her from the tub?

Lt. Brailey.  Was called to the scene by officers that thought death was suspicious. He noted nothing out of place, carpet was dry. (guess it would be by then!) Blood stains. (we knew about them already) Droplets on drain of tub. (Mine always has a couple droplets on the drain) He found magazines near the tub that were wrinkled but not wet. They usually wrinkle from being wet, they obviously had dried before he got there. I guess no one has ever mentioned how they removed the tub. There had to be particles, dust, possible tile pieces that fell in the tub. How damaging can that be to evidence? Did they bag the tub before removing it from the wall?

By the way, Brailey testified that the 911 call was 6 1/2 minutes long, the prosecution claimed it wasn't that long during closing arguments. 

Uptogrove, the Coroner. Finds that manner of death is by drowning. Small, minor bruises on back of head (could have been caused by moving Sarah) Cuts to upper lip. I recall someone trying to say those were caused by a punch in the mouth? They were confirmed to be from the intubation tools. Now what is it? Did he punch her in the mouth from this violent struggle they supposedly had or did he drown her in the toilet, bathtub or sink? There are so many angles the prosecution has taken, I'm getting confused.  Shows hemorrhaging in neckline due to blunt force or compression. They have to compress on your neck to intubate you don't they? It's very aggressive form of CPR isn't it? We'll just skip the rest since the prosecution was just focused on the neck and trachea. Defense's expert witnesses later testify that all those injuries can be caused by aggressive CPR Attempts. 45 minutes worth, several intubation attempts. He testifies that no abnormalities and no signs of anything medical could have happened to her to cause drowning. According to him, this is why he decided this was a homicide. He had not consulted EMT/police reports before ruling homicide either. Oh, did I mention he missed a laceration on a major organ? The Liver.

I don't feel the need to go over too many of the defense witnesses because I have already stated some of the testimony while refuting the prosecution's witnesses. And most of the character witnesses said nothing but good about Mr. Widmer. No priors, no history of violence. Dr. Spitz is a world re-nowned pathologist that the jury decided was not credible because of his memory lapse. Maybe due to the fact that he is 84 years old?  I would offer this to you, the man has performed over 55,000 autopsies, the man knows his stuff. The jury decided because he couldn't remember a few details from his book which was written years ago that he was not credible. WOW. He determines that the cause of death could not be determinable by anyone. Balco testifies that suspicious bruising could be caused by CPR efforts and Smiles testifies that he would have expected to see more bruising and injury to her body then he saw. Basically three experts say one thing, three experts say the opposite. Which both theories seem plausible. (theories again)

Now that I have outlined the basics of the trial and given you my opinion on testimony, I'm going to give you my theory as to what happened that night. After all, a theory is what convicted Mr. Widmer as guilty. Why can't my theory be correct?

Mr. Widmer was downstairs watching his Bengals game and had a few beers like many of us do to relax. Laying around in his boxers. Sarah joined him for a bit but was suffering from a major headache and her neck hurts so she goes up to take a bath. She fills the bath, gets undressed and primps while bath is filling, leans over and turns faucet off and has a slight seizure, enough to render her unconscious and slowly falls forward into the tub. (Could explain the sliding hand prints, right?) Once she slides into the water, still seizing, (not all seizures are violent) she inhales a large quantity of water and hence the drowning process begun. Ryan finds her just as he states he did in the 911 call and assumes she must have fallen asleep since she has been know to do it before. He sees her, and panicks, pulls her head up from the water and immediately pulls the drain in the tub and starts to try and "wake" her. Maybe a few pats to the face, calling out her name to arouse her. He realizes she is not breathing and possibly attempts to blow into her mouth a few times. (his attempt at CPR) He then realizes that he needs immediate help and decides to call 911, he quickly but gently lays her back down in the tub to grab his phone, dials 911, no connection. Sees her cell phone and calls from that phone. The tub is draining, she is already starting to dry. He finally gets the dispatcher and everything that follows is in the 911 call. The call lasted 6 1/2 minutes. You can hear the sirens arriving towards the end of the call. Prosecutors said they arrived within 2-3 minutes. How can that be when you clearly hear them arriving at the end of the call and the call lasted 6 1/2 minutes? Her body very well could have been dry upon their arrival or slightly damp. There was no water on the floor because the tub had been most likely completely drained by the time the dispatcher told him to remove her from the tub. She had already started to dry. The prosecution's biggest deal was how dry everything was which makes no sense if they claim a violent struggle occured. If you try to drown me, no matter from front or back, I'm going to fight. There is going to be water everywhere! 

Let me ask you this, just say the same thing happened, same night but Ryan was still working and her mother was visiting or spending the night. Would she have been charged with murder the very next day?

I believe this man is innocent. I believe there was a horrible tragedy in that home but not from his hands. There was no motive. No Defensive wounds. All prosecution and defensive experts testified against each other. It is not unreasonable to think she could have suffered a first time seizure, or sudden death syndrome because it happens. So why should my theory be hard to believe? You expect me to believe that this young man would just decide to push his wife of only 4 months under water for no reason and drown her. And you expect me to believe he was quick enough to stage a 911 call to cover his tracks? She was still warm or even hot to the touch when first responders arrived. He must be a quick thinker and possibly go into an acting career!

 The "so called" motive about the Adult Friend Finder web site is garbage. Everyone looks at strange websites here and there. I've looked at quite a few things I should not at the request of my friends. I would hate for people to search my computer. Rachael Hutzel is not very professional and it seems as soon as someone backs her in a corner, she throws something out that is utterly ridiculous. She was feeling heat about this verdict and very well deserved. The evidence in this case was weak and the prosecution was lucky enough to sell the jury on their weak argument. The reasonable doubt was all over this trial but defense didn't do enough and the jury didn't recognize it. There is no way this man should be sitting in a cell right now. He was convicted on theory and opinion.