The Mysterious Murder of Marilyn Sheppard Quiz

Answer: Spencer Houk

On the afternoon of Saturday, July 3, 1954, in the county of Bay Village in Cleveland, Ohio, Dr. Sam Sheppard, a doctor of osteopathy, and father of a young son, saved a child that was hit by a car. Sadly, the child died later that day. The child would not be the only person to die that holiday weekend. Little did Bay Village know that another person would die that weekend, a person whose last name would live in infamy.

After saying goodnight to their neighbors, the Aherns, Marilyn, who was five months pregnant, went upstairs to get ready for bed, and Sam fell asleep watching "Strange Holiday," a movie on television; the time was a little after 11:00 P.M. According to Sam, a while later (the exact time never being mentioned), he heard what he claimed to be his wife screaming for help. Running up the stairs, and according to him, he saw a stranger in his wife's bedroom. The stranger and Sam went at each other, and then Sam was knocked unconscious when someone hit him from behind.

According to Sam, when he woke up from being struck, he checked to see if his wife was alive, and went to check on his son. He then heard a noise, as if someone was trying to escape through the back door. Running down the stairs, he saw the stranger sprinting across the backyard heading toward the beach. When Sam and the stranger arrived at the beach, Sam dove for the stranger and wrestled him to the ground. As the two were wrestling, Sam was rendered unconscious, again.

When he woke up on the beach, he realized his wallet, keys, and ring were missing, and weakly walked back to the house, now his wife's murder scene, and checked his wife again. For a long time, he walked the hallway and every once in while going back in to check his wife. He then went downstairs and called his neighbor, Spencer Houk.

When Spencer Houk and his wife, Esther, arrived, Sam was downstairs, pacing nervously; he motioned them toward the stairs. When the Houks went upstairs, they found Marilyn on her bed, bloodied. They then came back downstairs and called the police...the time was 5:57 A.M.

How could Sam not hear an intruder in the house? Why had the intruder not murdered Sam, but instead killed a defenseless woman? With their young son sleeping near the murder scene, how is that the boy never heard a sound? Why would the intruder leave a living witness? Why, as claimed by Sam, would the intruder still be in the house after rendering the doctor unconscious when he had the perfect opportunity to leave? If Sam's story is to be believed, why hadn't their dog warned the family of an intruder on the premises before the stranger entered the house? Surely, the dog would have barked endlessly at the intruder, thus warning the Sheppards before the intruder reached the house.

Answer: A medical bag, which contained a watch, a ring, and keys

Spencer Houk called the police at 5:57 A.M., a few minutes after being called to the Sheppards' house; the police arrived at 6:02 A.M. Policeman Fred Drenkhan walked up the stairs that had blood on every step. He went into the room where Marilyn's body was, and immediately saw that there was no possible way for her to still be alive. Her body lay prone toward the bottom of the bed, her buttocks were flush against the footboard of the bed, her legs through the slats of the footboard, her unbuttoned nightshirt pulled up to her chest and exposing a breast. The room was awash in blood.

Sam was taken to Bayview Hospital, where he was examined by doctors. They found that Sam had several bruises, chipped teeth, and a fractured vertebra in his neck.

Outside, neighbors of the Sheppards arrived. Some entered the crime scene, contaminating evidence. Some police officers and neighbors began to search the grounds for anything that could be traced to the bushy haired stranger that had supposedly killed Marilyn Sheppard and wounded Sam.

A short while later, important evidence was found by Larry Houk, Spencer and Esther's son. Larry found Sam's medical bag, and brought it to the attention of the police. When the police looked inside they discovered Sam's watch, which had a drop of blood on it, his Hanover fraternity ring, and his keys. The bag itself didn't have blood on the outside or on the inside.

Unfortunately, the medical bag and the evidence that it contained could not be checked for latent fingerprints, because they were handled by several different people, including the police.

One can only wonder why Sam was not hurt worse than he was. Comparing his wounds to Marilyn's wounds, it is safe to say that Sam was barely wounded. In fact, his wounds looked to be inflicted upon him by someone who had fought for their life. Why, if the intruder came to the Sheppards' house to rob them, would he take items of little value, and then leave them at the scene? Considering that these items were important to Sam, doesn't it seem likely that he was the culprit, and wanted his personal items returned to him?

Answer: That there was no evidence of a break-in, and that, in his opinion Sam Sheppard murdered his wife

At 8:00 A.M., Dr. Samuel R. Gerber, the county coroner arrived at the scene of the murder. He examined the body of Marilyn, and estimated that she was murdered somewhere between 3:00 A.M. and 4:00 A.M. Gerber came to this estimation because Marilyn's watch had stopped at 3:15.

According to Gerber, Marilyn received 35 stab wounds to her head, and that she had fought for her life. Gerber examined the Sheppard house, and came to the conclusion that there was no evidence of a break-in. Gerber also came to the conclusion that Sam murdered his wife, although he didn't have an explanation as to why the doctor would resort to murder.

Gerber was intent on getting, first hand, Sam's story. Since Sam was taken to Bay View Hospital, Gerber and Chief John Eaton went to the hospital; Eaton waited in the cruiser while Gerber interviewed Sam. Sam gave his story to Gerber, the same story that he would give for the rest of his life, that a bushy haired stranger had murdered his wife and severely wounded him, leaving him for dead on the beach. Upon leaving Bay View, Gerber requested, and received, the clothes that Sam wore during his struggle with the intruder. Later, these clothes would be thoroughly examined for hairs, fibers, and blood.

On the night of July 4, 1954, a criminal attorney, William Corrigan, visited Sam in the hospital. The news media was shocked that Sam would hire a an attorney, especially if he was as innocent as he claimed.

Considering that Sam Sheppard never changed his story, was it possible that he was innocent of the murder of his wife? Or, could it be that he had his 'story' rehearsed to perfection, perhaps memorized?

Answer: $10,000

A few days after the horrific murder, Dr. Charles Elkins examined Sam in Bay View. According to Elkins, Sam had severe trauma to his neck, as well as severe bruising to his face. However, Elkins did say that his injuries were not life threatening.

The Sheppard family, Richard, Sr., Richard, Jr., and Stephen, did not think that Sam should be questioned by the authorities because they felt he was weakened due to the attack he supposedly suffered.

The police, feeling like they were getting no where with Sam or the Sheppard family, told reporters that Sam was not cooperating. When Sam heard about this, he offered $10,000 for information leading to the arrest of the person who murdered his wife, and also issued this statement: "I have never refused to talk to any authorities or give them any information I had."

On Thursday, July 8, 1954, Sam was brought back to his house, now a crime scene, to view the evidence and retrieve personal belongings, and to give a renactment of the events of July 4. Later that day, the Sheppard family agreed to let Sam be interviewed, and at the end of the interview, he said: "I was in love with my wife and she was in love with me. We got along wonderfully."

Days after the murder, the police closed the Sheppard house to the public, something that should have been done from the beginning.

Answer: Susan Hayes

On July 21, 1954, at the demand of the citizens and the press, Dr. Gerber held the inquest into the murder of Marilyn. The inquest was held at the Normandy Elementary School, a few miles away from the murder scene, was largely attended by housewives and reporters.

During the inquest, Sam had testified that he and Marilyn had not argued or discussed divorce, and he also testified that he had not had an affair with Susan Hayes. This was a bold faced lie, as it was discovered that, yes, Sam and Marilyn had argued and had discussed divorce. It was also discovered that, yes, Sam had an affair with Susan Hayes. However, Sam never thought that what he said at the inquest would be held against him.

The day the inquest started, a headline stating "SUSAN HAYES ADMITS AFFAIR, FLIES TO CITY" told the entire world that Sam had lied. This led to speculation that, if he lied about the affair then maybe, just maybe he lied about not murdering his wife.

According to Hayes, she and Sam had sex in his car, in the office above the hospital, and that he stayed with her on and off when he visited Los Angeles; Hayes said that the affair had been going on for about three years.

On July 29, 1954, Sam was arrested for the murder of his wife, after 25 days of speculation of whether or not he would be arrested. His arrest came on the heels of a headline from the newspaper The Press, which stated "Quit Stalling and Bring Him In!" Sam was questioned for twelve hours, without benefit of his attorney, during which he kept to the story he told from the beginning. Also, on the day that Sam was arrested, Spencer Houk was brought in for questioning about the murder of Marilyn Sheppard. Houk was questioned for four hours and released.

From this day forward, Sam's life would never be the same. If Sam was as innocent as he claimed, why would the police arrest him? Obviously, the police had to have had some kind of evidence or they wouldn't have arrested Sam for the murder of his wife. But, did the police really have the evidence?

Answer: False

On October 18, 1954, Judge Edward J. Blythin was elected to oversee the case of Sam Sheppard. Judge Blythin refused a change of venue, stating that Sam could get a fair trial in Bay Village. Jury selection began immediately, but it would take two weeks for the jury to be selected, and amazingly, the prosecution and the defense didn't use all their peremptory challenges.

On November 4, 1954, the state of Ohio versus Sam Sheppard began. The trial began with Deputy Coroner Adelson showing the autopsy pictures of Marilyn, which were horrific and grisly. Throughout the slide show, Sam didn't once look at the pictures of his butchered wife.

Next to testify were the Aherns, who told about their dinner the night prior to the murder. A particular piece of testimony from Nancy Ahern, considered hearsay, was allowed in. Nancy Ahern claimed that on that night, Marilyn confided to her about her and Sam's marital problems, and said that she was thinking about a divorce.

Next to testify were the Houks. Spencer Houk told about the early morning call from Sam, and told about viewing the body. Esther Houk testified to the same thing as her husband, but took it a little further. She said that the Sheppards were always having arguments, which were so loud that she was able to hear them at her house.

Next to testify was Dr. Gerber, the county coroner. He claimed that there was no evidence of an intruder or break in. Gerber also said that a bloodstain on the pillow near Marilyn looked as though it came from a surgical instrument. When asked about what kind of instrument could have caused the stain, Gerber was unable to say exactly caused it.

The most important witness for the prosecution was Sam's mistress, Susan Hayes. Hayes testified in explicit detail about her and Sam's trysts. With Hayes' testimony, the prosecution rested.

The defense began with Steve Sheppard, who testified about seeing a cigarette floating in the toilet. Steve said that this proved that an intruder was in the house, because Sam and Marilyn didn't smoke. Several medical doctors also testified about how Sam looked and acted in the hospital.

The star witness for the defense was Sam himself. He testified about his marriage, his affair, and the night of the murder. He repeated the same story that had been saying. He denied murdering his wife and deliberately injuring himself as an alibi; he was insistent that a bushy haired stranger had murdered his wife. The defense rested with Sam's testimony.

Each side was given five hours apiece for closing arguments. The prosecution, which consisted of John Mahon, assistant county prosecutor, and his assistants Saul Danaceau and Thomas Parrino, closed their case with Parrino questioning what Sam was doing that night, where he really was that night, and why he wasn't attacked first and more severely. For his part in the closing arguments, Mahon said "If the burglar was in that room and took the time and trouble to strike all those vicious blows on Marilyn, I ask you why the assailant did not use that same instrument, not to hit Sam 35 times, but to strike one single blow against him. A burglar does not want to leave a living witness at the scene of a crime. Be fair to the defendant. Show him the same mercy he showed his victim."

The defense consisted of lead criminal attorney, William Corrigan, and assisting him were Fred Garmone, William Corrigan, Jr., and Arthur Petersilge, the Sheppard family lawyer. Corrigan, upset about the massive media coverage, stated that Sam was tried by the newspaper before ever going to trial, and said "If you read a story like this about the People's Court in China or behind the Iron Curtain it would raise your hair on your head. But this is something that happened in our own city of Cleveland." To finish his closing argument, Corrigan stated "two or three minutes in the bedroom of Marilyn and about 45 minutes around the home of Sam Sheppard. ... Can you, on that type of evidence, take away his life? Can you, on that type of evidence, take away his freedom?"

On Friday, December 17, 1954, after six weeks of testimony, the case was given to the jury. For the first time during the entire trial, the jury was sequestered. On December 21, 1954, the jury came back with a verdict. The jury found Sam innocent of murder in the first degree, but found him guilty of murder in the second degree. Judge Blythin passed sentence immediately, giving Sam life in prison.

Was the jury correct in the verdict it reached? Was Judge Blythin wrong for not allowing a change of venue and for allowing hearsay testimony?

Answer: That the defense failed to use all of its peremptory challenges

Immediately following the guilty verdict of Sam Sheppard, William Corrigan collaborated with Dr. Paul Kirk, a world famous criminologist. Kirk, after examining the Sheppard residence and looking at all the evidence, stated that he found evidence which pointed to the innocence of Sam. Kirk put all the information he acquired from his research and from examining the house and all the evidence into a 56-page affadavit.

In July 1955, armed with the affidavit, Corrigan went for an appeal based on new evidence. However, much to Corrigan's horror, the three panel judge committee stated that the evidence was not new, and would have been known to Corrigan had he examined the house when it was offered to him. Corrigan stated that he didn't examine the house because, if he had, the prosecutor would have had someone there, watching what his defense team found in the house. The panel was unmoved. When Corrigan argued that Sam didn't receive a fair trial, the panel said that Sheppard would have had a fair trial if the defense would have used all its peremptory challenges.

In April 1956, Corrigan brought the appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court ruled against Corrigan on the same grounds that the appellate court had done - lack of new evidence.

Corrigan fought to bring the appeal to the United States Supreme Court, but the U.S. Supreme Court refused to even hear the case. This took the wind out the appeal's sail. Corrigan continued to file for appeals, but was continually shot down. It seemed as though it would take a tornado to get the appeal. The tornado was soon to come...

Answer: Richard Eberling

In 1959, Richard Eberling was arrested for theft. When the police searched his person, they discovered a ring that belonged to Marilyn Sheppard. The police were dumbstruck. They wondered how, if Sam was the murderer, Eberling had Marilyn's ring. It was soon discovered that the ring was given to Marilyn's sister-in-law shortly after Marilyn's death, and that Eberling had stolen it from her; this relieved the police.

However, Eberling was to tell police something else, something that no one had known. Eberling had owned a window washing business in 1954, and serviced the Sheppards. According to Eberling, two days prior to the murder, he was washing the windows and cut his finger. He walked through the house, with his finger dripping with blood, to the basement to wash the bleeding finger.

This statement caused the police some worry, as they thought they had all the blood accounted for. The police brought this information to the new county prosecutor, John T. Corrigan and to Dr. Gerber, both of which ignored the information.

Could it be that Eberling was the killer, and actually dripped blood when he killed Marilyn? If so, it would account for no evidence of a break in, as Eberling knew the layout of the house and knew that the basement door would be unlocked.

Answer: F. Lee Bailey

In 1961, Paul Holmes, a writer, investigated the Sheppard case. He put all his information into the book "The Sheppard Murder Case." In that same year, William Corrigan passed away, leaving Sam without an attorney and with the Sheppard family desperate to get Sam a new trial.

Paul Holmes contacted the Sheppard family and told them he knew of brilliant young attorney named F. Lee Bailey. The Sheppards met Bailey and acquired him as Sam's attorney. Bailey interviewed Sam twice in prison, and came away believing that Sam was innocent. To that extent, Bailey went on the defensive and went about getting Sam a new trial.

Bailey brought the case of Sam Sheppard all the way to the United States Supreme Court, and got him a new trial. The Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark said, "The massive, pervasive and prejudicial publicity attending petitioner's prosecution prevented him from receiving a fair trial consistent with the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. Despite his awareness of the excessive pretrial publicity, the trial judge failed to take effective measures against the massive publicity which continued throughout the trial or to take adequate steps to control the conduct of the trial."

In 1966, after serving 12 years of a life sentence, Sam Sheppard was freed. However, the state of Ohio had the choice of letting Sam go on with his life or retrying him for the murder of his wife. They opted for a retrial.

Answer: False

After being free, Sam was once again brought up on charges of murder. However, this time around, the trial was set in Cuyahoga County, and was presided over by Judge Francis Talty. Talty ordered that there would no cameras, no sketch artists, and no press tables. He also ordered that no one was allowed to get up and walk around the courtroom, unless it was the prosecution or the defense, and that no one could leave the courtroom while court was in progress.

The second trial of Sam Sheppard began on November 1, 1962. The prosecution, headed by John T. Corrigan and his assistant, Leo Spellacy, used the same witnesses as in the first trial, but with one glaring difference, they weren't allowed to use Susan Hayes or even mention her name. This greatly hindered the prosecution.

The defense, headed by F. Lee Bailey, and his assistant Paul Holmes (who was not allowed to sit at the table because of past association with the press), went a different route than the first defense team did.

When Bailey questioned prosecution witnesses Spencer Houk and his ex-wife Esther, startling new information came out. It seems that Esther recalled lighting a fire in the fireplace because she said it was chilly on that Fourth of July night. Bailey noted that on that night it was 66 degrees, which is not chilly in the dead heat of summer, and certainly not worth lighting a fire for.

When Dr. Gerber testified, he didn't mention anything about a surgical instrument creating the bloodstain on the pillowcase, and even though he didn't mention it, Bailey forced him to state what he thought created the bloodstain. As soon as Dr. Gerber said that it looked like it came from a pair of pliers or a surgical instrument, Bailey went on the defensive. In fact, for all the prosecution witnesses, Bailey went on the defensive. After nine days of testimony, the prosecution rested. It was then Bailey's turn to put on one of the greatest shows of that era...the defense of Sam Sheppard.

Bailey's first witness was a man named Jack Krakan. In 1954, Krakan was the bread man for the Sheppards. He testified that several times he saw a very distinguished looking man in the kitchen of the Sheppard home, and testified that it was not Sam.

The defense's star witness was Dr. Paul Kirk. Kirk testified to what he found at the Sheppard residence. He said that there was blood from someone other than Sam and Marilyn, that there was evidence of a break in, and that the killer was left handed.

One thing that was different in this trial was that Sam did not testify. After Dr. Kirk gave his testimony, the defense rested. It was then time for final summations.

Fifteen days after the trial began, Corrigan gave his closing argument. According to him, the blood on Sam's watch told him who the killer was. Corrigan also gave a description of the murderer, the murderer being in his opinion, Sam.

Bailey began his closing argument by saying, "Somebody had an awful hate for Marilyn, Somebody had hate this defendant could never have known--and that person spread that hate around Marilyn's room in her blood." Bailey then went on to describe the killer, and went on to discount all of the prosecution's evidence. He closed his arguments by saying, "Society has given Sam Sheppard a promissory note and it is payable now."

The jury was given the case on November 16, 1966. A short while later, they reached a verdict, the verdict being not guility.

It seemed as though the case of Sam Sheppard was finally over. But, in reality, it was far from over.

Answer: Spencer Houk

After Sam was found not guilty of the murder of his wife, Bailey went to the police and told them what he couldn't say during the trial...that Krakan, the bread man, had seen Spencer Houk kissing Marilyn several times.

Bailey also said that under hypnosis, Sam revealed that he felt his neck being crushed by someone stepping on the back of it, and that the person walked with a limp.

With this new evidence, a grand jury convened, and after interviewing several witnesses, declined to bring charges against Spencer Houk.

Answer: Professional Wrestler

During Sam's 12 year imprisonment, he met a woman named Ariane, and when he was released they were married. The marriage didn't last long, as they were divorced in 1968, citing irreconcilable differences.

Sam reapplied for his medical license, and was granted it back. However, he was sued for malpractice because a terminally ill patient died in his care.

In 1969, Sam met 20-year old Colleen Strickland, and were married on a trip to Mexico. Colleen, the daughter of a wrestling promoter, persuaded Sam to become a professional wrestler. Sam was pretty good at wrestling, even using his very own submission hold, "The Nerve Hold," which he learned when he was doctor.

On April 6, 1970, Sam was found dead at his and Colleen's house. The cause of death was liver failure. It seemed as though Sam was bent on slowly killing himself by drinking two-fifths of alcohol a day.

Sam died with people still believing that he killed his wife, a belief that many still hold to this day. But is it true? The truth would finally come out years later.

Answer: New Albany, Ohio

Known as "Chip" in 1954, Samuel Reese Sheppard carried the burden of his father through childhood and adulthood. Always bullied by kids who called his father a killer, young Sam fought back, because he believed in his father's innocence.

After his father was arrested for the murder of his mother, young Sam went to live with his uncle Stephen. After his father was found guilty at the first trial, young Sam was sent to the Culver Military Academy, and excelled there. While at Culver, his father was freed from prison, retried and found not guilty at a second trial.

After graduating from Culver, he went into dentistry, and when his father died in 1970, he moved to Boston and became a dental technician. Throughout his life, young Sam refused to talk about the murder of his mother or his father's conviction.

Then in 1989, at a rally in New Albany, Ohio, Sam spoke publicly for the first time about his mother's murder and his father's conviction. He said at the rally, "The Fourth of July, at dawn, my mother lay dead, just down the hall from me as I lay asleep. On the shore of the lake below our house, my father lay half in and half out of the water, viciously knocked unconscious. My father sat in the Cuyahoga County Jail, weathering one of the most potent blitzes aimed at any one individual by the news media in modern times. I feel it, and I will feel it for the rest of my life, how close we came to death -- my father and I -- 35 years ago in this city."

From this moment forward, Sam was in for the fight of his life, a fight to prove that his father was innocent.

Answer: Patricia Bogar

In 1987, Lakewood police, a suburb of Cleveland, received a call from a woman named Patricia Bogar. It seemed that Bogar was the long time girlfriend of Richard Eberling, the Sheppards' former window washer. She told the police that Eberling forged the will of Ethel Durkin, a woman whom Eberling had been the caretaker for. Bogar also told the police that Eberling and his friend O.B. Henderson and set up fake burglaries as part of an insurance scam. She also told them her belief that Eberling and Henderson had murdered Ethel Durkin's sister as well as Durkin herself. This information piqued the curiosity of the police, who immediately looked into Eberling's past.

It was found out by the police that Ethel Durkin's death was a homicide, and they brought Eberling and Henderson up on charges of murder. They were sentenced to life in prison.

What are the possibilities that the man who used to wash windows for the Sheppards, and who admitted that he was in the house two days prior to the murder of Marilyn and dripped blood, was in reality a cold-blooded murderer himself? The odds are astronomical. When Sam heard about the arrest and conviction of Eberling, he was dumbfounded. Why hadn't the police thoroughly searched Eberling at the time of his mother's murder, instead of zeroing in on his father?

To Sam's surprise, he received a letter from Eberling requesting a meeting with him. Eberling lured Sam to the prison by saying he had information as to the death of his mother. Sam took the bait.

According to Eberling, on July 2, 1954, two days before the murder, and the day that he supposedly cut his finger and bled in the house, he was washing windows upstairs when he heard a woman shouting, "If you don't leave him alone, I'll kill you!" He said that the woman who was doing the shouting was Esther Houk. Eberling then went on to say that Esther had murdered Marilyn because she was sick of the affair that Marilyn and Spencer were having, and that on the night of July 4, 1954, Esther finally got her revenge and brutally murdered Marilyn, and that Spencer and Sam covered it up. Eberling then told Sam something astonishing. He said that after Sam was acquitted of murder at the second trial, he had a chance meeting with the doctor, who supposedly told him who killed Marilyn.

According to Eberling's story, on the night of July 3, Spencer Houk sneaked over to the Sheppards' house while Sam was asleep on the couch. Unbeknownst to Spencer, he was followed by Esther, who went berserk when she caught Marilyn and her husband hugging. She attacked Marilyn with a patty iron and it was Esther who Sam had heard screaming upstairs, and when Sam ran to upstairs, Esther fell into his arms saying she was sorry. Sam felt so bad for Esther that he let Spencer talk him into helping him cover it up. Spencer took Esther back home where they lit a fire and destroyed the patty iron. Meanwhile Sam went about staging a break-in, while unbeknownst to him he was actually setting himself up to be accused of murder.

Eberling said that Sam told him what really happened because he was a friend of the family.

Is Eberling's story believable? I believe the evidence speaks for itself, as we shall see.

Answer: Vern Lund

Shortly after entering the fight to clear his father's name, Sam received a letter from Vern Lund, who was dying of cancer. In the letter, Lund said that on July 2, 1954, it was he not Eberling who washed the Sheppards' windows. He also said that Eberling was not in the house at all on that day. Lund made a video tape of this information and signed an affidavit to the truthfulness of the letter. Even with this information and the signed affidavit, the Cleveland police showed little interest in Eberling.

If Lund is correct, then why would Eberling say in 1959 that he had dripped blood in the house two days before the murder? Could it be that Eberling indeed dripped blood in the house, but not when he claimed? Could it be that it actually happened on the night of the murder? If so, was Eberling the lone killer? Or, was he hired to commit the murder?

Answer: A vial, which contained a sliver of wood with blood on it

In 1993, Sam still determined to prove his father's innocence, received help from the AMSEC, an investigative firm that usually worked for corporate businesses. Delving into the case, AMSEC found a piece of evidence that was used in the first trial, a vial which contained a sliver of wood with blood on it.

In 1954, DNA testing was not available, but it was available in 1993. However, the DNA testing was put on hold because Eberling's attorneys fought to keep him from having his blood tested. But, in 1996, a court ordered Eberling to provide a blood sample. The sample was tested along with the blood on the sliver of wood, and came back that both were of the same DNA. However, the police didn't really become convinced because in 1959, Eberling had told them that he bled in the house. Although the DNA proved that the blood on the sliver of wood was Eberling's, and although they had Vern Lund's affidavit, the police were unmoved.

The AMSEC also discovered a man named Ed Wilbert, who also worked for Eberling's window washing company. Wilbert told AMSEC that Eberling didn't get along with Marilyn, and that Sam more than likely never saw him or knew of him, because Eberling was always at the Sheppards' residence when Sam was not there.

Besides Ed Wilbert, AMSEC also discovered evidence that there were two kinds of spermatozoa found inside Marilyn during the autopsy. DNA testing of the vaginal swab indicated that the spermatozoa came from Eberling and Sam. AMSEC also discovered a piece of physical evidence that was kept out of the trial, a plaster of a tool mark near the basement door, indicating a break-in. This was the evidence that was needed to declare Sam Sheppard innocent of the murder of his wife.

Answer: False

Sam Reese Sheppard had the body of his father exhumed so investigators would have his DNA to test against the evidence. The evidence proved conclusively that Sam's blood was not in the house, but it also proved conclusively that the spermatozoa on the vaginal swab was a mixture of Sam's and Eberling's.

The body of Sam Sheppard was reburied beside Marilyn's.

Answer: The fetus of her unborn child

In 2000, the new Cuyahoga County prosecutor Bill Mason asked to have Marilyn's body exhumed. The reason he wanted her body exhumed was because the fetus of her unborn child was buried with her, and he wanted the fetus tested to see exactly whose child it was. Back in 1954, it was widely believed that the baby Marilyn was carrying was not Sam's.

On July 25, 1998, Richard Eberling died in prison, taking with him the chance to have a third criminal trial. But, this didn't deter Sam from fighting to prove his father's innocence, he knew he just had to fight that much harder.

Answer: January 31, 2000

On January 31, 2000, the civil trial to declare Sam Sheppard innocent of the murder of his wife, not just 'not guilty,' began. Judge Ronald Suster presided over the trial, and hit the plaintiff (the estate of Sheppard) with a double whammy: They could not use Eberling's criminal background, and the original 1954 transcript would be allowed to be read at the trial. These two rulings effectively pulled the plug on the civil trial.

The plaintiff said that United States Supreme Court had overturned Sheppard's conviction, but it was quickly pointed out by the defense (the state of Cleveland) that it was overturned due to pretrial publicity.

Sheppard's former attorney, F. Lee Bailey, also testified at the civil trial, stating that in his opinion Eberling didn't murder Marilyn, and that in his opinion a woman did, that woman being Esther Houk.

Also testifying at the trial was Dr. Tahir, a forensic scientist, who stated that the blood in the Sheppard home did not come from Sam. He also pointed out that Eberling had scar, reminiscent of a bite mark on his left wrist. He said that in his opinion that the scar was the exact width of Marilyn's teeth, and that in his opinion Eberling received the scar when Marilyn bit him. Tahir also mentioned a spot of blood on Sam's pants. He said that the blood was not Marilyn's and not Sam's, but that it came from a third person. He also said that the blood was spatter, meaning that Sam had to have been in the room when the blood was shed.

The defense argued the plaintiff's case point by point, and introduced documents and evidence that proved that Sheppard killed his wife. The defense also made mincemeat out of the supposed tool marks on the basement door, a door which led into crawlspace, therefore effectively dismissing the break-in theory.

On March 13, 2000, the case was given to the jury. In a little less than three hours, the jury came back with a verdict of not innocent.

After the verdict was read, Sam stated, "The Sheppard family may be bloodied but we are unbowed. My father's life was destroyed by the state of Ohio. I will never forget that. I will never let you forget that."

The truth of who killed Marilyn Sheppard is in the evidence, and the evidence speaks loudly. According to Mark Furhman, a nationally known detective, any case can be solved as long as the people looking at the evidence are willing to listen to it. But what does the evidence in this case say?

Answer: James Call

In April 2002, Bernard F. Conners, a former FBI agent turned author, wrote a book entitled "Tailspin: the Strange Case of Major Call." In the book, he claimed that Call was a pilot in the Air Force in 1954, and that he went AWOL. According to Conners, Call was visiting his sister in Manua, Ohio, which is 30 miles from Bay Village.

Conners said that Call, a known burglar who killed a policeman in Lake Placid, New York during a robbery, was the bushy haired stranger seen by several people in Bay Village shortly before and after the murder of Marilyn Sheppard.

Conners said that Call carried a luger and a crowbar and walked with a limp, something that matched what Sam had said during his hypnosis. Call also smoked, which could have accounted for the floating cigarette in the toilet of the Sheppard home. But is this theory believable? I suggest that the evidence in this case points to one person and one person only...Sam Sheppard himself.

In 1999, Gregg McCrary, a former FBI criminal profiler was asked by the state of Ohio to arbitrarily examine the evidence in the murder of Marilyn Sheppard. On December 1, 1999, McCrary released his findings. In his report he said that the murder of Marilyn Sheppard was a staged domestic homicide conducted by Sam Sheppard. He said that the indicators for a staged homicide are greatly present, the indicators being:

1.) The murder weapon was removed from the scene and no latent fingerprints of value were developed.

2.) The victim's body was not concealed rather it was displayed to suggest she had been sexually assaulted.

3.) The victim's residence was the crime scene.

4.) The offender staged the scene to make Marilyn Sheppard's death appear as though it occurred in the context of a failed sexual assault or a burglary.

5.) The victim's pajamas were only partially removed as her pajama bottoms were pulled off one leg and her top was unbuttoned and pushed up over her breasts.

6.) The offender exposed the victim's breasts, pulled off one pant leg and slightly spread her legs implying that the victim was the target of a sexual assault.

7.) The autopsy of Marilyn Reese Sheppard revealed no evidence of vaginal or anal trauma, no seminal fluid nor any indication of sexual assault even though the offender had positioned her body to imply that a sexual assault had occurred.

8.) The allegation in this case is that an intruder fatally assaulted Mrs. Sheppard while her husband escaped with nonfatal injuries in spite of having two separate physical confrontations with the alleged murderer.

With the case of Sam Sheppard hitting every indicator of a staged domestic homicide, how could it be that Sam was innocent? It seems as though Mark Furhman was right when he said that the evidence speaks for itself, and the evidence in this case proves that Sam Sheppard was indeed the killer of his wife.

All information came from www.crimelibrary.com.