Hudson murder suspect refuses lie detector

William Balfour, the 27-year-old convicted felon suspected in the murders of Jennifer Hudson‘s mother, brother Jason and nephew Julian, refuses to take a lie detector test, but insists he’s innocent. Balfour is the estranged husband of Jennifer’s older sister Julia, and once lived in the home where the murders took place but was kicked out last winter. A gun was found Wednesday in a vacant lot near where Julian’s body was discovered in an SUV. The seven-year-old had been shot twice in the head. The weapon has been sent to a crime lab for testing. Balfour, who served seven years for attempted murder and carjacking, was released on parole in 2006. He was taken into custody after the Hudson murders and is being held as a “person of interest.” It’s come to light that he missed several conditions of his parole — required anger management counseling and substance abuse courses. Records show that Balfour was arrested with cocaine in his car last June, but authorities overlooked the incident rather than return him to prison on a parole violation. Balfour’s father is currently serving a 30-year prison sentence for murder. His brother served time for drug dealing. His mother, Michele, claims her son is innocent.

Share this article:

Comments & Discussion

  1. Nancy • October 31, 2008 @ 9:25 AM

    What a psycho! Why in the heck would the Hudson family allow this slimy creature to live in their home up until they kicked him out last year? He was out on parole for carjacking and attempted murder and in possession of cocaine for christ sake!! What were they thinking? As for HIS family….wastes of skin…dad, brother, himself, but mostly HIS MOTHER!!! As for missing several of his parole conditions, the cocaine in his vehicle and his parole not being revoked due to such and now a triple murder….sh!t, meet fan!

  2. jay • October 31, 2008 @ 10:05 AM

    if he says he innocent and doesnt wanna take a test.u no hes lying

  3. Samantha • October 31, 2008 @ 11:05 AM

    I love how the law can be turned to protect the guilty and help them by infringing on their first amendment rights and all that nonsense. OK So if he wont take a lie detector test, where was he at the time of the murders? does he have a solid aliby? I mean the gun is being processed by a crime lab. Were his hands checked for gun powder residue? Along with any and all clothing he was found in? I feel so strongly that whomever did this should be severely punished! To the fullest extent of the law right down to the last letter! However think about this…HIS father MURDER? HIS brother DRUG DEALER? Now I don’t presume to seriously think that there is something phsycologically wrong with his gene pool but come on do the math people!

  4. Anonymous • October 31, 2008 @ 11:25 AM

    People like him are the reason I believe in capital punishment. The system is too soft and it allow things like this to continue to happen to innocent people. Get rid of the garbage.

  5. Anonymous • October 31, 2008 @ 1:51 PM

    Make him sit thru SAW 5

    … No seriously.. if he’s guilty, fire up sparky!

  6. tributegirl • October 31, 2008 @ 5:08 PM

    Right on, I agree with all the comments here. Now, I’m a little confused, his mother says he’s innocent? Now, how would she know that, was she with him? Was she there? No, she doesn’t know d1ck all, so she should just shut her pie hole!!!!! And he should fry!!!!!

  7. Nancy • October 31, 2008 @ 5:14 PM

    His hairdresser should “fry” too!!! LMAO.

  8. Anonymous • October 31, 2008 @ 7:08 PM

    this guy should be executed in public

  9. nat • October 31, 2008 @ 9:03 PM

    that poor girl! she must be devastated. i know i would be, i wish her the very best in the coming years , this will take a long time to heal if ever, miss Hudson my thoughts are very much with you, as far as this animal and true monster is concerned . i think they should castrate him and go medieval on his ass if only for the child! whoever it was!!!!!

  10. shorty • October 31, 2008 @ 10:39 PM

    I think who ever is guilty of this murder should get the death penalty..if you can point a gun at an innocent 7 year old kid and should him twice in the head shouldn’t have the right to live after commiting such an act..along with his grandmother and mother it just makes me sick..

  11. shorty • October 31, 2008 @ 10:41 PM

    sorry I meant shoot him not should him in the head..my bad..

  12. Mira • October 31, 2008 @ 11:46 PM

    creeps like him do not deserve a second chance wht the hell were they thinking they realized him

  13. Nancy • November 1, 2008 @ 12:17 AM

    Jeeze nat, that’s real “lady-like” of you to say! ROFLMFAO!!

  14. Patricia • November 1, 2008 @ 3:13 AM

    What is going on in this world where you can take a little child and shoot him not once but twice in the head and leave him in a car? MY heart goes out to Jennifer Hudson, she lost her family, her mom, her mainstay. There truly are no words that can be said to make her feel better or put her at peace other than they are with god, but way too soon. Keep your chin up Jennifer and I do hope whoever is responsible for this tragedy is brought to justice.

  15. even Obama likes the Cosmos Rocks! • November 1, 2008 @ 10:49 AM

    »Gosh.What a tragic situation…

  16. Jessie • November 1, 2008 @ 6:36 PM

    This is horrible. I don’t know who Jennifer Hudson is really, but my heart goes out to her. I can’t imagine going through something so terrible.
    As for the murderer…i’m not going to say its this guy because thats not proven (yet)…I hope he gets the worst possible punishment a man could get, 3 people is bad, but a KID?!
    He deserves to rot.

  17. Arnold • November 2, 2008 @ 3:52 PM

    If he won’t accept Lie detector than how about at least a hair cut?

  18. mandee • November 2, 2008 @ 8:25 PM

    i dont think anyone should have the right to refuse a lie detector test. its one of the only things that can prove weather or not youre guilty (most of the time anyways) and if you DO refuse, clearly you have SOMETHING to hide. so people shouldnt be so calmly saying IF its him. it WAS him. and his mother is only saying she thinks hes innocent so she doesnt feel soo bad for being responsible for raising a child that would kill anyone, let alone an innocent child. (not saying the rest of the family wasnt innocent) was the little boy his? im confused by this. i strongly feel that when terrible things like this happen, the family should be able to have the guy that did it (once proved without a doubt) and should have up to 7 days to do anything and everything they want to him. they should be able to torment, torture and inevitably kill the person that inflicted this kind of emotional pain on them, and inflicted that kind of physical pain causing death for their loved ones. i do honestly believe if the law was set so that whatever they did to your family they had to endure by that family once they were caught, they wouldnt do such terrible and stupid things.

  19. tributegirl • November 3, 2008 @ 10:33 PM

    Yeah, Mandee, I think that’s an awesome idea. If people knew they were going to have to face the same torture they’ve caused, it may make them think twice about doing it in the first place.
    Hmm, I wonder what the Queen thinks about this? Pretty silent on this article, I see.

  20. Nancy • November 4, 2008 @ 12:59 AM

    She’s busy getting more rug burns!!! 😛

  21. Caller • November 4, 2008 @ 10:31 PM

    mandee, your knowledge of polygraphs is clearly lacking. Even if he did not have the right to refuse (he does, it’s a minor thing called the 5th amendment), it wouldn’t matter because the polygraph DOESN’T WORK! It is not reliable. It is unscientific, unreliable, biased, and UNRELIABLE. Don’t take my word for it. Have me do a polygraph test, or better yet, look up a report called Polygraph and Lie Detection, by the National Academy of Sciences. I am so sick of slow witted people assuming that a person invoking the right of silence is somehow hiding something. When you see what happens to people who are completely open and honest with police (David Milgaard, Steven Trescott, Arar as just a few examples) only an utter idiot would not invoke the 5th (or, just be silent here in Canada) till they spoke with a lawyer.

  22. Trish • November 4, 2008 @ 11:47 PM

    Sadly, people are too eager to jump on the bandwagon and consider what his friends or family did or didn’t do as reasons to find this man guilty. A man’s guilt or innocence must lie in the evidence. Guilty by reason of association isn’t fair, and especially when it involves murder. If he’s guilty, the evidence will prove it. If not, why ruin someone’s life? The murderer in this case should have to pay with his life, IMHO. But only if all the evidence proves without a doubt that he did it.

    The Paul Bernardo/Karla Homolka case was the last time I truly wished Canada had a death sentence. As hard as it is, I’ll leave Balfour’s judgement to God.

  23. Anonymous • November 6, 2008 @ 6:17 PM

    My God, look at that hair!

Join The Conversation:

Trending Articles

Current Poll

  • Which TIFF film are you most looking forward to this fall?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

You Might Also Like


Close Menu