Today, the defense team for William Thomas Zeigler has filed a Motion for Rehearing. It is sixteen pages long and concisely shows you why it is crucial to get a rehearing.
Charles Mays
From the beginning, the State made Charles Mays a victim. In part, they were right. In part, they are wrong. This motion shows you exactly why Mays is both victim and accomplice. He started as accomplice until he became a victim.
By exclusively posing Charles Mays as a victim, the Court concluded that if Mays did not kill Zeigler’s father-in-law Perry Edwards or any of the other victims, then Zeigler must have done that. The Court ignores the third option: multiple perpetrators.
It is not likely that Mays killed Perry Edwards. Remember the Court used the recent DNA results to back that up. “The Court reasoned that since Mays does not have the victims’ spattered blood—only Perry’s saturated blood—on his clothing, Mays was not the individual who beat and shot Perry.” Zeigler had drops of Perry Edwards’ spattered blood on him but not in quantities you would expect from a fatal beating. Most likely is that they both walked through Perry Edwards’ blood.
Multiple perpetrators
The only explanation is multiple perpetrators and accomplices. Based on all the evidence that was presented, the Court notes that it “was at least possible based on the evidence presented.” Let go over this.
The Court knows Zeigler did not shoot himself
At the December 2025 evidentiary hearing, the defense showed the undisputed DNA evidence that “Zeigler had his own blood spatter on both the front and the back of his pants” AND “that the spatter demonstrates that someone was beating Zeigler after he had been shot.” If not Mays, someone else beat Zeigler.
The above alone raises reasonable doubt because it goes to the heart of the case that “evidence, which the State elected not to contest or refute in any way, demonstrates that Zeigler did not shoot himself but rather was shot by someone else: one of the perpetrators.”
Charles Mays is key
Zeigler never denied he shot Charles Mays twice. During the autopsy, Dr. Ruiz concluded Mays had indeed been shot twice: once in the back and once in the front abdomen. One wound was superficial. The other bullet had passed through his liver. However, Dr. Ruiz found only about 200 cc of blood in the peritoneum meaning neither shot wound had been fatal. Zeigler shot Mays but his shots did not kill him.
Crime Scene
When I first saw the crimes scene pictures, I thought the floor around Charles Mays had been wiped after he was murdered by someone who knew not to leave prints or traces.
Charles Mays died of a fatal beating. The beating would have left blood on the killer. During the beating, the killer may have placed a hand on the floor potentially leaving a print or traces of their own blood. The Court skips over the detail that Zeigler did not have Mays’ blood on him. If not Zeigler, then who delivered that fatal beating? Most likely, someone Charles Mays would be able to identify to the authorities if he survived that night. And that is why he had to die. Because Mays knew who was there and if he survived, he could make a deal with the authorities by naming accomplices.
The prosecution never explained who manipulated Mays’ body after his death. This manipulation was noted by police officers in their reports. Between the times that the body was found, initially photographed, and the time that all the crime scene photographs were shown in court, things had changed. Mays’ right arm was moved and the crank (most likely the murder weapon) was placed away from him. This change was noted by comparing all the crime scene pictures and show activity around Mays’ dead body.
Forensics know not to do this and even if, it would have been documented. No such activity was noted around Virginia and Perry Edwards. If one person was responsible for all four killings why did they clean up around one dead body but not around the others?
Eunice Edwards-Zeigler
Eunice’s body had been manipulated after death too. Her left hand, now missing her diamond ring, was placed in her coat pocket. Her body position is inconsistent with being shot in the head. Her legs were neatly straightened as if someone had tried to give her some dignity in death. This could have been done by Mays as his DNA was found on Eunice however, it does not prove he killed her. To be complete, Zeigler’s DNA tests showed he did not have the DNA of either his mother-in-law Virginia Edwards or that of his wife Eunice Edwards-Zeigler, on him.
Motion for Rehearing
There is a lot more so if you are following the case or are interested in forensics, crime scene investigations, the use of DNA in old cases, then please search online for: my orange county clerk and then go to search records. Fill in William Thomas Zeigler’s name. Once you see his records, click on either case link to find the motion for rehearing.
Other concerns I have in this case are discussed here. All the posts about William Thomas Zeigler can be found here. To be continued.