Woman who wrote a book on grief after her husband's death is charged with his murder

[–]Scale-Alarmed 336 points337 points338 points 3 years ago (93 children) | Copy Link

[–]onlyidiotsgoonreddit 39 points40 points41 points 3 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok-Crab-4063 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]antifeminist3 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -240 points-239 points-238 points 3 years ago* (88 children) | Copy Link

Being greedy doesn't make you a murderer. For all we know, they shared a drug habit. I doubt they'll be able to make this stick unless the person she bought the Fent from testifies she told them she was going to use it to kill him or they have some sort of evidence indicating that she was planning for his imminent death outside the insurance shenanigans.

All her attorney has to do is claim they shared a drug habit and that he accidentally took too much--it's very easy to OD on Fent. 5x the lethal dose is not that much more than a single fatal dose. Especially if the guy measuring the drugs just drank an alcoholic beverage.

A decent attorney will also prevent the prosecutor from submitting the attempt to change the life insurance policy as evidence in the trial based on it being prejudicial. Meanwhile, they're going to paint the prosecutor and cops look like they're beating up on a widow and single mother who is also a childrens' book author.

I hope the prosecutor has some good evidence, because her attorney is going to wreck them in trial otherwise. Juries hate convicting women that fit this profile.

[–]Scale-Alarmed 84 points85 points86 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -53 points-52 points-51 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How is the Defense Attorney going to prevent the fact that she tried to change the Key-Man Insurance that she has zero signatories on?

Because whether or not she tried to commit fraud is immaterial to the question of whether she committed murder. The only thing it might do is point to motive.

This is where the prejudice comes in. Evidence in a trial can be probative (i.e., it proves a claim) or it can be prejudicial (i.e., it disproves a claim). When the probative value of evidence significantly less than the prejudicial impact on a defendant, it may not be allowed at trial. In this case, it would be very easy for someone to hear she was fiddling with life insurance and make the jump in conclusion that it makes her seem more guilty of murder. In reality, there is no logical reason to believe the two are connected at all. Such evidence is at best circumstantial, but to the average emotional juror it would likely be damning. Hence, it would almost certainly be tossed.

The Insurance Company itself expressed concern over the issue. She has zero control in regards to changing key-man insurance for a business she has zero interest in.

Absolutely. What she did is almost certainly fraud of some sort--however, committing fraud has nothing to do with being a murderer. For example, let's say you have a man who spent five years in prison for trying to murder his wife. Now, let's say that man is on trial for stealing a car. The prosecutor could not bring up the man's criminal record in that case.

[–]az226 36 points37 points38 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnmakingTheBan2022 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]_xGizmo_ -10 points-9 points-8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]randomperson1296 33 points34 points35 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]kurotaro_sama 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -6 points-5 points-4 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I've already read everything in that article--that's not going to be enough to make a case one. Half of that evidence won't be allowed in at trial unless they have additional evidence. And there is a good chance that there is--but my original point is that this is a weak case based on this evidence.

Real life isn't like the movies. It's very hard to get prejudicial evidence introduced at trial when all of the evidence is circumstantial. E.g., none of these people will be allowed to testify at trial that they were told the husband feared for his life because it would violate the hearsay rule. Hopefully he wrote it down somewhere--otherwise, no one will be able to bring it up. The only exception would be a dying declaration, and that would not apply to any of the cases listed in this article.

As of now, her attorney could claim that she and her husband enjoyed drugs together and there is really nothing they can say to the contrary. They would not be allowed to bring up his fears she was trying to kill him unless he wrote them down. They won't be able to bring up the shady insurance changes unless they can provide some material evidence that she was behaving as if with knowledge of his imminent death.

And they might well have it. But nothing in your article indicates that they do.

[–]randomperson1296 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]randomperson1296 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

They can she has civil lawsuit going on against the sister and Trust where husband moved the money before he was murdered.

Also it could be brought in as character evidence to prove the motive.

Permitted Uses; Notice in a Criminal Case. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. On request by a defendant in a criminal case, the prosecutor must:(A) provide reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial; and

Besides:

Her procuring & possession of drug. His death due to fentanyl and she being the last person to see him alive. The fact that fentanyl found is not of medical grade and administered orally.

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

They can she has civil lawsuit going on against the sister and Trust where husband moved the money before he was murdered.

Irrelevant. They wouldn't be able to admit that in the murder case.

Also it could be brought in as character evidence to prove the motive.

No, it couldn't. It's strongly prejudicial and not remotely probative.

https://casetext.com/rule/utah-court-rules/utah-rules-of-evidence/article-iv-relevancy-and-its-limits/rule-403-excluding-relevant-evidence-for-prejudice-confusion-waste-of-time-or-other

The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

The fact that it goes to motive is insufficient to overcome prejudicial exclusion if it is purely circumstantial in nature. This is the part that people don't understand (seemingly including yourself): it's absolutely 100% possible (and normal) for a judge to exclude evidence that everyone agrees is relevant to the case simply because its emotional impact on the jury is disproportional to the rational impact it ought to have from a legal POV.

E.g., I've defended in the past an individual who self-identified as an "information terrorist" and maintained a blog claiming that copyright is an abuse of human rights. I had that evidence thrown out at trial when he was sued for copyright infringement because it was prejudicial and contributed nothing towards answer the elements of the crime for which he was accused.

Her procuring & possession of drug.

Is proof she bought a drug. She can simply say that they partied together and both consumed drugs recreationally. They would have no way to rebut that claim.

His death due to fentanyl and she being the last person to see him alive.

The drugs are answered by them both using recreationally. Her being the last to see him alive is meaningless--this isn't a missing persons' case. You're parroting things from true crime shows without understanding where they apply.

The fact that fentanyl found is not of medical grade and administered orally.

Doesn't matter. She got what the dealer gave her. Recreational users use all sorts of drugs. If anything, she can turn that to her favor and say that her and her husband didn't know the difference, which helps explain his death.

[–]randomperson1296 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Irrelevant. They wouldn't be able to admit that in the murder case.

Not really, there can be exceptions and instances where evidence from a civil trial may be relevant and potentially admissible in a criminal trial, or vice versa. For example, if certain evidence is relevant to both cases and meets the requirements of admissibility in the criminal trial, it might be considered. Additionally, in some cases, evidence discovered during a civil trial could trigger a criminal investigation.

This is exemptional. Fact that the Victim moved money into a trust (which is complicated costly procedure) and was murdered days later.

The fact that it goes to motive is insufficient to overcome prejudicial exclusion if it is purely circumstantial in nature.

Are you trying to prove my point?

What others said that the Victim told them about the accused might me considered hearsay.

But Acussed's action of interfering with keyman insurance is extremely indicative of

** "opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident"**

Is proof she bought a drug. She can simply say that they partied together and both consumed drugs recreationally. They would have no way to rebut that claim.

How by getting her to testify for herself? That would be extremely bad defense.

They could then burry her in mountain of evidence with rebuttal witness, how Victim was afraid to be killed, how he was planning for divorce.

Fentanyl for recreational use, lol?

She bougut 60 pills that goes well with 5x poison dosage.

His death due to fentanyl and she being the last person to see him alive.

Now I'm really doubting you?

She's the last person In contact. She's the person who called the police. She's the one who gave her husband drink, after which he died. She's the one who made recorded statement.

No wonder your are not a criminal lawyer, even a regular attorney could run you out of court.

[–]widdlebuddy 22 points23 points24 points 3 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -18 points-17 points-16 points 3 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]widdlebuddy 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -7 points-6 points-5 points 3 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 30 points31 points32 points 3 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]apocbane 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]PRSHZ 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StonerChef 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iamthedevilfrank 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StonerChef 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 55 points56 points57 points 3 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -88 points-87 points-86 points 3 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 35 points36 points37 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -39 points-38 points-37 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Your own profile claims you're a "Patent Attorney" on numerous posts.

Copyright attorney, not a patent attorney. They aren't the same thing.

So what exactly is your credentials as a lawyer fuckwit?

Just that...I'm a copyright lawyer. You realize that copyright lawyers and criminal lawyers are...both lawyers right? We take the same courses, etc. The only difference, when there is one, is specialization of practice. An attorney that works in IP can also take criminal cases (which I often do--particularly, people being prosecuted for torrenting, etc.). In fact, I barely ever work civil cases--the majority of my practice is federal criminal cases. So--I know a thing or two about criminal law.

"She is explaining that she has a Patent regarding .............I have no fucking idea and she has zero point.......DeRp!"

Did you have a stroke? You're not making any sense.

[–]Aelonius 28 points29 points30 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -5 points-4 points-3 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aelonius 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Additionally, my dislike for copyright lawyers stems from the systemic refusal of reforms and the people that support that refusal.

What the fuck does that even mean? My entire practice is defending people being prosecuted for criminal accusations based on stuff like torrenting. You're right. I'm the bad guy. I'll just let all these kids go to prison because they wanted to download Mulan. Fuck me right. Your Disney overlords will be pleased by your corpo loyalty.

But in the end, the circumstances are highly suspect.

And that's precisely why the judge would not allow it in court. You're not allowed to present "suspicious circumstances" into evidence.

That pre-nup is a motive.

You'd never be allowed to argue that in court.

The key-lane insurance is another motive.

You'd never be allowed to present that in court.

A smoking gun.

It's not a smoking gun--the fact that you think it is is precisely the reason the judge would not allow it in as evidence.

The fact that assets were moved out of concerns seems to indicate a larger issue than expressed.

Speculation--cannot be presented at trial.

And now the lady is arrested for murder?

I'm 100% convinced that the police and prosecutors would not have taken this route if there wasn't a really good reason--if I was in Vegas, I'd be betting she did it all day long.

BUT. Based purely on what is printed in this article, they have no case. That's the entire point of my original comment--there must be something that we're not getting in this article, and it must be something significant.

[–]Deadpoolgoesboop 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonmymouse 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -15 points-14 points-13 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]kurotaro_sama 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]kurotaro_sama 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I do know more about legal issues than non-lawyers because I'm a lawyer.

One, thats not guaranteed. Two, you seem way too confident about something you have so little knowledge of. Three, how do you know whether or not the other people are lawyers? Or is this just you being the smartest in the room?

Then why do I live in a better home and why do they keep coming to me to save their asses from going to jail?

Oh, look at Mr. Lawyer over here who doesnt understand how cause and effect work. Do I need to explain why the Kings were kings as well?

I am better than the vast majority of people based on every conceivable metric that matters. I'm not going to be shy about it: humility is not a virtue--it's a trick sold to slaves by their masters to keep them docile. You might embrace slave morality. I don't.

Lol, the well paid slave sings about how we are the real slaves while he dines with the master. Holy hell, you can't make this shit up. NPD at its finest.

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

One, thats not guaranteed.

Yes, it is.

Two, you seem way too confident about something you have so little knowledge of.

I don't have little knowledge of it. I'm commenting explicitly on what is known based on public articles and I'm juxtaposing that against the possible evidence we don't know about to have a discussion about what the prosecutor is going to need to show at trial to get a conviction. That's not me talking about something I have little knowledge--it's me talking about two knowns (what is publicly available and what is necessary to obtain conviction) and using those two knowns to arrive at deductive conclusion: what they need to have that they have yet to reveal.

Three, how do you know whether or not the other people are lawyers? Or is this just you being the smartest in the room?

Because if they were lawyers, they wouldn't be calling hearsay evidence.

Oh, look at Mr. Lawyer over here who doesnt understand how cause and effect work. Do I need to explain why the Kings were kings as well?

I don't really need to. The worst king was better than the best peasant.

Lol, the well paid slave sings about how we are the real slaves while he dines with the master. Holy hell, you can't make this shit up. NPD at its finest.

Slave morality refers to the philosophy of Nietzsche--not actual slavery. You'd know that if you'd ever had an education. And oh, look..."NPD." I found a tik-toker. /eyeroll

I'll tell you what. I'll teleconference in to a therapist from my lakehouse to set your mind at ease.

[–]TalosSquancher 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]StonerChef 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TalosSquancher 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]purplepinkmoon 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrockBox 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hiddenagem 36 points37 points38 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HolyLordGodHelpUsAll 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blue_shadez 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]blue_shadez 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]blue_shadez 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrucioIsMade4Muggles 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]blue_shadez 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]HolyLordGodHelpUsAll -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]redoilokie 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PedroAlvarez 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]donkey_doug665 295 points296 points297 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ferrisIS 37 points38 points39 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WS0ul 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]donkey_doug665 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoyVault 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]McJiggiez69 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dls95405 74 points75 points76 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Fluid-Cattle-5835 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcboogle 107 points108 points109 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PRSHZ 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]yawaworhtg 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mcboogle 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Slarhnarble 50 points51 points52 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Scale-Alarmed 62 points63 points64 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ArthurHaroldKaneJnr 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Enmanyan-V 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]420fmx 38 points39 points40 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dock3511 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ChedderChethra 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]420Aquarist 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]farendsofcontrast 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]_stoned_chipmunk_ 43 points44 points45 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]The_Blue_Adept 31 points32 points33 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Admirable-Jaguar-144 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MadLaamaDisease 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ebonyudders 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Extension_Risk9458 -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]curiouscabbage69 -55 points-54 points-53 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]tucci007[S] 54 points55 points56 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]curiouscabbage69 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]xdrakennx 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]420fmx 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Albatross85x 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]DieselVoodoo -10 points-9 points-8 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]joshokodo 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Woman who wrote a book on grief after her husband's death is charged with his murder
Author	tucci007
Upvotes	1555
Comments	106
Date	May 10, 2023 7:05 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PussyPassDenied
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/pussypassdenied/comments/13e02z3/woman_who_wrote_a_book_on_grief_after_her/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PussyPassDenied/woman-who-wrote-a-book-on-grief-after-her-husbands.1218907 https://theredarchive.com/post/1218907

Comments