Supino Found Not Guilty, Plans to File Lawsuit

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.
Data pix.

WATERLOO, Iowa -- After 10 days of testimony, it took a jury just six and a half hours to reach a verdict in Terri Supino’s double murder trial.

The jury found Supino not guilty Friday afternoon in the brutal 1983 murders of her estranged husband Steven Fisher and his girlfriend, Melisa Gregory. The couple’s bodies were found beaten to death at the Copper Dollar Ranch near Newton.

Since the murders, Supino has lived under a cloud of suspicion. She said this past year, the year she spent in jail, was the worst.

"Anxiety. Taking medication. I've been a nervous wreck. I just want to go home,” Supino said after the trial concluded.

Supino was arrested 31-years to the day after the murders, even though prosecutors admitted there was no physical evidence -- no hair, no fingerprints, and no DNA -- linking her to the crime.

It was only after the Jasper County Sheriff’s Office called in the TV show Cold Justice to help solve the case that she was charged.

Supino said the Sheriff’s Office took a large chunk of her life by first suspecting her then jailing her for almost a year.

“Yeah they have. They've taken 30 years of it. But I'll get even now. I'm not done,” said Supino. When asked what she meant by that she replied, “I'm gonna sue somebody."

Supino said she went to jail because of a TV show, "Because they wouldn't air the show unless they had someone in custody and that somebody was me."

Supino said on her first night of freedom after being jailed she plans to eat some fast food and catch up with her family.


  • John Smith

    Scarcely surprising, given the case against her. I wonder if “Cold Justice” will do a follow-up special on the verdicts?

    • T Lakin

      How is that surprising?? LOL You want to live in a world where we send people to prison for life merly based on here say? Didnt think so. She may have committed the murder, she may not have, all the matters is the state could not prove she did it. That dosnt change the fact that her life is still probably ruined, she will always be known as the women who was on trial for double murder.

  • i wonder

    when Hal snedeker said…granting me immunity is one thing.signing my death warrant is another…was he afraid of supino ? or someone else

  • Holly Johnson

    Thank god she was acquitted. Can you imagine if you could go to jail for life without any evidence and only suspicion because you were married to the guy? If you don’t have DNA, eye witness or something of that nature, than you don’t have a case. Think how difficult it is to commit a murder today without leaving behind some kind of trace evidence. You’d have to be dexter.

      • BobDole

        She may have been involved – but there wasn’t a shred of proof to find her guilty. This was a pretty lame case from the beginning for them to attempt to prosecute.

      • Holly Johnson

        That’s the thing about small town gossip. You can think you know, you can judge and talk about her all day long. Your free to do so, just understand that at the end of the day, its just that, gossip. Doing hard time requires more than rumors or innuendo. It requires trace evidence of some sort. I don’t know if she did it or not. Common since tells me, probably not. More likely the drug dealer was involved but that’s just a guess as well. Thank god we need more than speculation to put someone behind bars.

  • Holly Johnson

    The case is close. How arrogant is that? If someone isn’t behind bars for the crime then you have not found the right killer yet. How many times has history taught us that we’ve tried and convicted someone of a crime and later found out (via DNA ect….) that we had the wrong person all along. So, why is this case closed? We’re they there? Did they see her commit this murder?

  • Copper Dollar Evil Injustice

    Chapter 21: Evil sure is ugly, and it looks like meth did it to her face. Found not guilty in less than a day. Whoa! That’s what needing a cigarette does to a jury in Waterloo. Well, at least it wasn’t Marshalltown. Ain’t no bout a doubt it, it was beyond reasonable doubt. Unless you’re a dote. Just wait, this crackhead will blabber her mouth off, and implicate her bothers and blubber of a sister-in-law. The County be counting on rounding up the whole family. Truth will haunt them, and Justice be waiting to pounce. Let’s have a family reunion. It’s potluck! Any semblance to this or that somebody, dead or alive, is merely coincidental, and whatever.

    • Justice needs to be served

      Family reunion or Family meeting yes. she will speak and this is not the end. Poor her she lost 30 years of her life. Boohoo what about the victims.

  • Justice needs to be served

    Seriously Terri, “I will get even now”. Wow, they took away 30 years of your life okay what about the victims they didn’t have the past 30 years. I will sue someone, go figure that isn’t surprising. You will reap from killing these two that is justice. NOT. Be happy you got away with murder. You know exactly what happened on that evening of March 2, 1983 and the best part of this all you have had to relive it and hope you have nightmares for a long time coming. The jurors obviously believed all that lied under oath and not the ones telling the truth. I do not believe the ones saying they heard you say you have killed or murdered was lying but was not enough to convince the jurors. It was premeditated and covered up very well. Someday you will meet your maker. Karma will come back around. Enjoy your lawsuits, Prayers for the victims families, Justice not served here.

    • Holly Johnson

      Wow. You really believe she was sooooo smart to commit this crime and not leave DNA etc….? You realize that 30 years ago we didn’t even know we had to cover our steps to not leave our DNA. Not buying the crazy your trying to sell. Your hate runs deep in your words. Then again, it’s easier to hate then love. If you believe in God passing judgment, then you should believe in not casting stones. Can’t pick and choose what you want from the bible when it fits your needs.


        Holly you have an opinion and so do I. swinging a hammer and killing someone the blood left behind is from the victims. Really it doesn’t matter what you or I think. The police did not do these victims any justice and do there jobs back in 1983. You don’t know much about this case. Facts Holly, do not judge me, and I am not a hater. Simply sayin justice was not served for these victims and she definitely knows that. More to it then what the media reported and what was presented, just sayin. She will answer to her maker. Amen. End.

    • John Smith

      “A confession of sorts.” Sure, because, while walking out of THIS courtroom, she couldn’t POSSIBLY have been making an allusion to being in a future courtroom, could she?

      See, there’s a small problem for you: Our system generally frowns on double jeopardy, and asserting that someone is “GUILTY AS SIN” of a crime that a jury found her Not Guilty of is still libelous.

  • John Smith

    Can’t say that I would blame her one bit for filing a civil suit. Incarcerating someone for a year needs to be expensive for authorities, if they are to ever learn from their mistakes.

    Again, anyone know if “Cold Justice” will be running any kind of special on this?

    • Holly Johnson

      Probably not. Wish I could see the episode. I’m addicted to the ID investigation channel. I’m convinced you can’t get away with crime anymore. Lol. I’m truely surprise they brought charges on her. Amazing how many still find her guilty in their own eyes avoiding the facts here entirely.

      • Small town hick

        Hey Holly it is not that hard to find it is called Cold Justice, Copper Dollar Ranch Murders look it up and it also seems like you have an opinion on all of this do some research and get a little closer.

    • Holly Johnson

      She should sue. Punishment of such is just and keeps them from shananigains like this in the future. protects the innocent from the crazies (most of the time). Lol.

      • John Smith

        Well, unless you were on the jury, it simply doesn’t matter what you believe. The jury saw the evidence the state presented and heard the state’s arguments for conviction. I would have to say that the state bringing this case with not even a scintilla of physical evidence of their contentions was damned poor prosecutorial discretion, at the very least. Near as I can tell, all they had was a theory of the crime, with nothing much to back it up. Not even a coerced confession, let alone a real one. Nada.

  • Krjbolej

    Guilty. I’m sure the jury thought so, too. They just didn’t have what they needed. I think the drug trafficking is what did the prosecution in.

  • Clyde

    Usually a court won’t allow hearsay, unless it’s an excited utterance… This case was all hearsay. I don’t blame that woman for suing somebody if not everybody. And I hope she gets a good lawyer to do it.
    A jailer says she was able to use both hands is your expert testimony? The prosecutor needs banned from law practice if that was his smoking gun. Nobody knows what being accused of something you did not do, especially if your in jail for it for a year.
    I could say you sleep with pigs, and you’d have some of your so called friends show up to testify they believe you do too…….. It’s up to you to prove you didn’t….. Good luck, because your marked for life for sleeping with pigs.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.