The True Story Here


For the true story visit movies based on true stories database
URL link: http://www.ginamarienueslein.blogspot.com/

reply

Not so true. Rather biased. I know, I was there during all this.

reply

Forensic tests used to convict Kulbicki have been proved unreliable. Kulbicki's conviction may soon be overturned.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/18/AR2007111801539.html

reply

aka-ed: you must be this slime ball's wife or son since those are the only two people on the planet that think this guy is innocent and will actually get his conviction overthrown. I've read a couple of your posts and I'm afraid you failed to notice (or maybe just mention) that the ballistic tests are the only element shown to be false (and not necessarily "faked", as you would have us all believe). This murderer was convicted TWICE on more than just ballistic tests.
There was an attempt to have the DNA thrown out and claim it wasn't the victim's but the skull bone fragment found in his truck has been restested and it has been shown (again) conclusively to be that of the victim's. I'd love to see a fancy and dismissive explanation as to how part of her freakin skull ended up in his truck.

Here's an article you must have missed in your exhaustive research (note: it is more recent that the one aka-ed keeps posting. No overturning the verdict...)

Baltimore Sun


DNA test said to counter Kulbicki

By Jennifer McMenamin, Sun reporter
September 12, 2007

New DNA testing of bone fragments found in the pickup truck of a former Baltimore police sergeant convicted of killing his mistress has revealed that they came from the victim, Baltimore County prosecutors wrote in a new court filing.

Prosecutors said the new round of testing counters James A. Kulbicki's continuing claims of innocence.

The lawyers representing the former police officer have challenged his murder conviction and asked for a new trial, in part because of what they characterized as faulty scientific evidence.

Kopera testified that bullet fragments found in Kulbicki's truck and in his mistress' head could have come from his gun -- testimony that a gun expert for the defense contradicted in April. Kopera did not participate in the analysis of the bone fragments found in Kulbicki's truck.

Previous testing of that evidence indicated that they were most likely human bone -- evidence that the veteran police officer explained at trial could have unknowingly been transferred from the scene of a homicide he was investigating to his clothes and then his truck.

But the new tests, prosecutors say, conclusively link the bone fragments to Gina Nueslein, the 22-year-old woman with whom Kulbicki had a three-year adulterous affair. Her body was found Jan. 10, 1993, in Gunpowder Falls State Park.

"I would like to hear an innocent explanation for how he has her skull fragment in his car," said prosecutor S. Ann Brobst, who ordered the new tests in April during five days of hearings on Kulbicki's request for a new trial. She said she received the test results Monday.

Kulbicki, 50, was twice convicted and sentenced to life in prison without parole in the fatal shooting of Nueslein.

Attorneys representing him now have asked Baltimore County Circuit Judge Kathleen G. Cox to grant him a third trial, in part, because of Kopera's perjurious testimony. The veteran state police firearms examiner killed himself after being confronted by Kulbicki's lawyers with evidence that Kopera had falsified his credentials and lied on witness stands across Maryland about college degrees that he never earned.

Brobst said prosecutors decided to have the evidence retested not because the analysis was relevant to the current challenge to Kulbicki's conviction but rather because the defendant "was going to repeatedly exult his innocence" through his lawyers.

"We thought that if we had forensic evidence that could pretty much definitively refute those claims that we should go ahead and have it tested," Brobst said.




You better understand I'm in love with myself Myself My beautiful self

reply

All I said was: "Forensic tests used to convict Kulbicki have been proved unreliable. Kulbicki's conviction may soon be overturned."

I don't claim to have any special knowledge of the case, I'm just repeating what I saw in the papers, which I find interesting because EITHER an innocent guy is in prison OR a killer may be freed. You. on the other hand, are carrying some weird kinda case here...you're so certain! And so scary. Please stay as far from me as possible, okie-dokie?

reply

He was framed by a fellow police officer who was also sleeping with her. She was a lot less innocent than the movie made her out to be. She slept with several cops. Don't hold true everything you read about and see on the news.

reply

Wow way to blame the victim...
why don't you just come out and say "the slut got what she deserved?"

This chick was far from innocent, but to defend that slime that murdered her by trying to attack her character speaks more of your own than hers.
Shameful.


You better understand I'm in love with myself Myself My beautiful self

reply

I was there when all this happened so I'm entitled to speak from my heart about it and how it affected certain people I care for and have known for many years. He was framed by another cop who was also sleeping with her. I don't wish death on anyone and it's terrible she was killed, I was just saying that she wasn't as innocent as the movie made her out to be. It was Hollywood bias and a lot of it was made up to enhance the drama. Everyone has their opinions based on the movie or the papers or the news coverage which is fine. It's only shameful you believe everything you read and hear.

reply

Stranger things have happened. I still can't presume to know. Greenie, you may well be right, and if so I'm sure we all hope the truth comes to light sooner rather than later.

reply

so basically, my character was the son of a whore?

reply

To Greenie: I don't believe everything I see/hear/read, thank you. And I respect your right to view things differently, but the sentiment of your original post was clear. You blamed a dead chick for her own murder. A slutty little chick? Probably- she was doing a married man and ended up pregnant. But to suggest she called it on herself is what is shameful.
I have read all that is still available on the murder and again, I find it amazing that anyone out there (outside of his own cheated-on wife) could defend this man. True, I wasn't there when it happened, but "fall-out"- which is what you keep harping on- seems like a very crude thing to base your obvious dislike for this woman on and is sickening. I'm a lawyer; I am not new to crime, its investigation, and its aftermath, so don't presume too much about my naivite' either. After having read as much as I could on the murder, I am still perplexed why you insist this was a "set up" by another cop unless you are somehow related to the man. Seems very suspicious. And I read the court transcripts on the original case and his appeals and several juries very much disagree with your take. One judge along the way allowed for a retrial- that's it. I know juries get it wrong (ie: OJ, Michael Jackson), but this guy has had more than his even two days in court....




You better understand I'm in love with myself Myself My beautiful self

reply

I do know this man and his family personally and I know a lot that most people don't know. I know that he is no killer. His stepson has been one of my best friends for 18 years- we've played in bands together- and I'd gotten to know his parents pretty well before all this nonsense took place. I'm here to defend what most people on the outside are swayed to believe by the papers, the movie, etc. I'm only speaking from my experiences with those in attack here and I know there is more that you are not seeing in the papers and on the "TV movie of the week". I feel badly for anyone who takes to heart every (or any) moment of that supposed re-dramatization with Joe Penny and Teri Garr. But you seem intelligent and have done your research- as much as is written or viewable. I just wish the real truth could be known despite how things look from the outside.

reply

This is a stupid argument. The guy had every motive and opportunity to kill the victim. I laugh at the notion that someone would conveniently kill that guy's mistress for him to "frame" him. Also that he would claim someone framed him. Really? Someone used his truck and his gun to shoot his mistress and badly clean up his truck and he didn't notice the truck was missing, was spattered with blood and bone fragments when he next drove it? Riiiiiiiiiight. Also his manipulations of witnesses and evidence at trial greatly speaks of the true nature of his character. Clearly he was also a real charm-fellow, easily able to convince most who personally knew to think he was a great guy. Con men can do that too. A dirty cop is the worst kind of criminal.

reply

"she wasn't as innocent as the movie made her out to be."

So the opposite of 'innocent' is guilty. Did she murder herself!
Since when is it a crime if she did sleep with other cops? Double
standard. Okay for men/cops to sleep around, but not for women?

No one else had a strong enough motive to want her gone but him.

reply

I'm going to leave it be at this point. I've said too much already.

reply