Anybody who has a website is, of course, free to force conversations in the direction they want. But in the case of a website that discusses crimes it is not okay to promote the convictions of people to the exclusion of examining evidence that contradicts that.
If a person wants to discourage people from seeing evidence that somebody is not guilty, especially when their website was involved in helping convict the person, that is obviously not right.
Websleuths has a well earned reputation for encouraging false convictions, and this case is not an exception.
Some of the actions of their moderators are mentioned on other pages, this page will elaborate and add other examples.
The founder and owner of the website is from.......Salt Lake City. She admits she followed the trial and admits she believes he is guilty because he was convicted. She is not interested in discussing any evidence that contradicts this.
She is a former disk jockey there and writes sometimes for Salt Lake City media.
She had previously said she knew Esar Met was guilty because he was convicted at a trial, and that nowhere had it been suggested he did not get a fair trial.
"Also, I live just outside Salt Lake and I remember this trial well. Nowhere has it been suggested that he didn't get a fair trial." ~Tricia, December 6, 2014
Maybe it hasn't been suggested that he did not get a fair trial because people from the Salt Lake City establishment, like Tricia, prevent the evidence from being presented on their forums.
On TrustPilot, Websleuths has four reviews, and all four are one star, but somehow the overall rating is 2.8.
4 x 1 = 4
4/ 4 = 2.8?