Comments by "Jim Werther" (@jimwerther) on "Follow The Money | Full Episode" video.

I like when 48 Hours brings us the really old episodes (13 years ago, in this case) because I forgot half of it already, and can rewatch. Plus the old episodes are better anyway.
274
His half sister gave him up. Her name was on a credit card in the case.
79
@soulfireonfire6423 The cousin's half-sister (or step-sister?) was questioned by police because her name was on a credit card they used. She thought police were concerned about an international drug smuggling ring, and told them that it was "only" about her brother killing Kissel together with his cousin. Can't make it up. They also didn't mention here that a third member of the family was also involved, although I don't know how he fits in.
24
@blueroses7935 You're welcome. There was a lot left out of this video.
16
@jert33 Plenty of evidence. Some people prefer fairy tales, thinking it makes them look smart. Just the opposite.
7
1. No one at 48 Hours reads the YT comment section. 2. They do post the original broadcast date near the start of very old episodes. Look back; the screen said 2011 for this one.
6
 @marygoff3332 Is it really necessary to spread hate and bigotry?
6
 @Sparrow8812 I'd rather have a Corolla bought with my money than a Ferrarri with ill-gotten gains
5
It's from 2011
4
@LifesAPeach2Me They absolutely have evidence. How much research did "Life's A Peach" do? Absolutely none, choosing instead to spread slander. YT commenters strike again with nonsense.
4
@chikkinnuggits And she was really pretty too. Oh well.
3
@unpopularopinion8608 Circumstantial evidence is evidence. And there was a lot of circumstantial evidence.
3
@soulfireonfire6423 They said money, which certainly seems accurate.
3
 @buckmeister78 Every single word of that comment is false. Learn the facts.
2
@scorbunny7737 Thank you 👍 Isn't it wonderful how some people love to push crazy theories without knowing anything about the case? Some people watch a 42 minute TV program and become immediate experts, more knowledgeable than those who invetigated it - and covered it - for years. Just lovely 🤦‍♂️
2
Seriously? Not Robert? Stamos is 1000x better looking than Andrew was.
2
Some folks absolutely love slandering innocent people, in this case falsely accusing the investigators. I guess it gives them the jollies. God help us.
1
@b294-r7q Why do YT commenters love to invent false stories when they don't even know the basic facts of the case?
1
@b294-r7q Watch out for the black helicopters 🤦‍♂️
1
@jert33 Luckily for the fantasists, YT deleted all my responses.
1
@b294-r7q Please never, ever sit on a jury.
1
@b294-r7q 100% false claims For shame
1
@b294-r7q "Facts are stubborn things" - John Adams Seek facts, not foolishness.
1
@scorbunny7737 👍
1
@scorbunny7737 👍
1
@scorbunny7737 👍
1
@scorbunny7737 👍
1
@b294-r7q Please never, ever sit on a jury.
1
 @jeremysmith9694 That supposed to be a joke?
1
@Sch586 And Stamos actually plays Andrew??
1
The evidence against the three Trujillos was relatively strong
1
@martinb5626 I like the idea that a commenter watches a 42 minute TV program and immediately knows the case better than those who investigated it for years. Uh huh. Try at least reading a few articles first. Even the jury would likely have unanimously concluded that the three cousins were likely guilty. The only debate was beyond a reasonable doubt or not. As always, though, certain YT commenters enjoy being the self-declared experts. Makes them feel smart. Ah, the irony.
1