Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Hillier is guilty

By RAMBOR - 18 April 2010 24

Hillier found not guilty – THEN WHO DID IT? Hillier had the motive and the opportunity. Ana was ever so frightened of him when she was alive. Ana was a good mother and a good person and was not involved in any out of the norm practices. They do not have any other suspects and this man now walks free with a smirk on his face – a guilty smirk at that !!!!! Did anyone mention the time he cut the brake lines on her car, or punched her in the face and broke her jaw for no reason. What sort of person is he to be allowed to walk free. Why did he burn his fingers when asked to provide fingerprints. Wake up!!!!!! this man should be behind bars.

[ED – And if Stephen Wayne Hillier wants to sue us for defamation, after all those lovely emails, we look forward to him proving the truth on the balance of probability and also damage to reputation]

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
24 Responses to
Hillier is guilty
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Anna Key 9:52 pm 19 Apr 10

bd84 said :

I-filed said :

I think the consensus regarding “innocent until proven guilty” is worth defending: better a guilty man walk free, than an innocent man go to jail.

He was found guilty. The only reason he is out is because of an appeal on technical grounds and that the second judge is incompetent and can list all the evidence that points to him and still find him not guilty. We all know he was the only one with motive and opportunity, we now have yet another murderer roaming the streets as a result of a chronically sick court system.

of course, the SECOND judge is incompetent. But if the guilty verdict was re-affirmed and Hillier appealled it further but with the same eventual outcome, I guess it would be the High Court judges that were incompetent. But the fact that Hillier had a motive, and an opportunity, and probably did do it, doesn’t mean it is proven that he did it. But maybe RA can be the final pillar of the justice system. I knew the victim – he/she was hated by the accused (reasons why being irrelevant), therefore the accused is guilty. Insert RA poll of how long the sentence should be. We could save a fortune on the court system

Clown Killer 2:01 pm 19 Apr 10

The reality is that if someone gets off “on a technicality”, what that means is the prosecution has failed.


It’s surprising just how often “a technicality” really means “an absence of evidence”.

astrojax 1:46 pm 19 Apr 10

todd carney prob’ly done it. [or not]

Aurelius 11:19 am 19 Apr 10

DMD – how dare you stand in the way of the self-righteous indignation of the RA lynch mob!

The reality is that if someone gets off “on a technicality”, what that means is the prosecution has failed.
Hillier fought for his freedom. The prosecution fought to convict him.
The prosecution lost.
If the lynch mob want to be angry at anyone, be angry at the incompetent people who allowed it to happen.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site