Charlottesville–Right Now: The Hook’s Courteney Stuart joins Coy to delve into the unsolved murder of Justine Swartz Abshire

11.10.10 The Hook’s Courteney Stuart joins Coy to discuss her cover story about the investigation into the death of Culpeper resident and Emerald Hill Elementary School teacher Justine Swartz Abshire. Recently uncovered details from the event which happened over 4 years ago have caused Justine’s parents to file a civil suit against a group of 9 conspirators. Listen in to find out all of the details, plus the author’s insights.

5 Replies to “Charlottesville–Right Now: The Hook’s Courteney Stuart joins Coy to delve into the unsolved murder of Justine Swartz Abshire”

  1. Way to go-I love this interview-a ton of details. Sounds like there are a group of people who need to come forward and give more details.

  2. Courtney, Thank you for the continued reports. By keeping this story alive and at the forefront, I hope Justine’s family will get justice. We were from Richmond and the mom of a murdered son, after 5 years we have yet to have our son’s murder solved and the situation is similar to Justine’s story. Awareness is diffidently the key. It seems until everyone is affected by murder, it will always be the family’s fight alone. I am gratful for the people who fight for victims rights and justice, the police, victims advocates and some caring reporters. Lest we Forget!

  3. Judging the behavior of a man who’s wife was found dead on the road is pretty distasteful. Mr. Barefoot may call the behavior of Mr. Abshire “creepy” but I assure him it’s not as creepy as finding your wife dead in the road at 1:30 in the morning. None of this behavior is in any way incriminating. Indeed it reminds me of the protagonist’s struggle in The Stranger; convicted of not showing proper remorse when his mother died.

    Withdrawing into a bedroom after finding your dead wife sounds pretty normal to me. Family members all of a sudden cleaning the house in such a circumstance sounds pretty normal to me. Yes the inlaws could have been treated better, but social ineptitude in the face of overwhelming tragedy is hardly one of the seven deadly sins.

    Real tragedies happen to real people and when they do these people are thrust into the spotlight. They don’t ask for this so they shouldn’t be judged for their “creepiness” or their social ineptness or the fact that they want to vacuum a rug when they know that people will all of a sudden be coming to the house.

    Mr. Barefoot would do well to remember that he is passing judgment on a man who has not been convicted of anything and who therefore is innocent in the death of the woman he married and found dead in the road.

    If there’s some actual evidence tying this man to the crime, I assume it will come out in court. But the fact that no criminal case has reached court is quite telling.

  4. The story the husband told is proof enough for the vast majority of people who have enough sense to see that it is ridiculous. The question is “Why is he lying?”

  5. Cville eye, many true stories are ridiculous. There is a saying, in fact, that covers this apparent anomaly: “Stranger than fiction”.

    I read the stories and believe that the husbands version of events is possible. I don’t believe that this is because I “don’t have enough sense to see that it is ridiculous”, but rather because I am not assuming what everyone else seems to be assuming: the husband must be guilty.

    I’m not saying that it can’t be true that he’s guilty, but certainly it is not “proof enough” that the recitation of (alleged) facts is hard to believe. That is a VERY low standard and for premeditated murder there is thankfully a much higher threshold to cross.

    The history of American jurisprudence is littered with the tales of innocent people that everyone “knew” to be guilty. Let’s all put on our thinking caps before we start accusing people of murder.

Comments are closed.