All Episodes Discussion

[Ohmo]

20 hours ago, Annber03 said:

My mom thought the same thing. Either that, or Angela might've put on some kind of disguise that made it hard for Annie to properly identify her, one of the two. 

Annie was near death by the time she called.  She had been tortured for hours and was in tremendous pain.  I think, by that point, she could have lost track of just basic connections between people....just general awareness of the world.  Plus, the 911 operator was asking ridiculous questions like "Do you need an ambulance?"  It just might have been all to much for Annie to process as she was dying, even though she knew Angela.  By the time Angela left, Annie was likely focused on just getting help.

[DonnaMae]

9 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I don't think Annie saw who stabbed her.  It was 3 a.m. She was probably sleeping when stabbed.  I don't think there was any indication that the lights were on. 

The killer arrived four hours earlier, so she had to have seen her sometime during those four hours.  I don't understand why the killer spent so much time torturing her.  She wanted her dead, so why not just kill her?  Why didn't Annie fight back?  Was she tied up?  So much of this case makes no sense.

[Ohmo]

40 minutes ago, DonnaMae said:

Why didn't Annie fight back? 

There's nothing that says that Annie didn't fight back, but even if she did, Angela was stabbing her over and over again.  Fighting back would have only worked to a point if Angela was intent on stabbing her.  She came after Annie with three knives.  I think the suggestion that Annie somehow didn't do enough is a bit much.

[iMonrey]

Quote

The killer arrived four hours earlier, so she had to have seen her sometime during those four hours.  I don't understand why the killer spent so much time torturing her.  She wanted her dead, so why not just kill her?  Why didn't Annie fight back?  Was she tied up?  So much of this case makes no sense.

Agreed. Like I said, I had a hard time following this. Apparently the neighbors first heard screaming around 11:00 and then again at 3:00 or thereabouts. It sounds like there were two separate incidents and they may not even have been related. The first may have been a different apartment altogether. Believe me, apartment buildings can be pretty noisy, and this one in particular didn't look particularly upscale.

If the killer had been in Annie's apartment for four hours torturing her that whole time, no way Annie didn't know who her assailant was. That means it had to be someone like Angela's ex, or someone else Annie didn't know. On the other hand, if the 11:00 disturbance was unrelated, then Angela herself could have taken Annie by surprise while she slept. That seems more likely to me.

[Crashcourse]

Alice.  Angela.  Annie.  I kept getting the names mixed up.

[Ohmo]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

On the other hand, if the 11:00 disturbance was unrelated, then Angela herself could have taken Annie by surprise while she slept. That seems more likely to me.

I think it's likely that Angela actually did it.  With the amount of rage, Matt veers more toward apathy.  Corinne said that he spent hours playing video games, and he had absolutely no drive to get a job.  I don't think he'd want to put the effort in to stab someone sixty plus times.  Angela seemed like the more dominant in the relationship.  I think she hatched the plan and did the killing.  I think he drove and cleaned Angela up after the murder.

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, Crashcourse said:

Alice.  Angela.  Annie.  I kept getting the names mixed up.

My mom commented on that during the episode. She was like, "Seems to be a running thing here, with so many people's names starting with 'A'." :p. 

[Josiemae]

Well, that was quite the parade of losers. Pathetic all around. 

The Detective was outstanding though. And it was so good to see Josh again! (I was getting worried.) 

 

[gaPeach]

I think Angela did it on her own.  For a couple of reasons.  One, Matt's comments that he woke up around 3am and having to help Angela shower.  It sounded real to me.  Second, there was only one set of boot prints at the scene.  I don't see how another person could have avoided stepping in the blood.  If the drove her, he never got out of the car.

I think Angela is a mean piece of work and got tired of Annie standing in the way of their free money from the state for Alice.  Matt is a big loser and too lazy to go and stab Annie 60 plus times.  Plus, they said that he and Annie had a good relationship until Angela got involved and started realizing that Alice could be yet another cash cow for them. 

So she got mad and left the home without or maybe she did tell Matt, drove to Annie's, broke in and stabbed her.  Maybe she wore a mask or maybe as another poster said upthread she was focused on trying to survive the attack.  Who knows.

But I think Matt helped after the fact.  Oh and did discuss hiring someone to kill her but was too lazy to follow through.

[amarante]

On 5/7/2022 at 7:37 PM, ridethemaverick said:

So instead of getting jobs, these two welfare queens made their living defrauding taxpayers and used their kids to do so, and when they stood to lose something, they committed murder, defrauding Alice of her own loving mother. 

I'm so disgusted. And now we get to house and feed one of them for the next 25 years or so. I hope the husband ends up in a cell some day, too.

Sidenote: the fraud part reminded me of a case of a couple that pretended to be disabled (the husband pretended to be a veteran). They rode around on scooters but were caught lifting heavy stuff and working out. I can't remember their names.

This was terribly depressing as I do think that Matt was in cahoots even if he was too lazy to actually do the killing. There are a few Dateline type cases in which a husband got away with murder for a long period of time but then eventually his sociopathic nature broke through and he was caught.

I wonder if he is still able to collect money on the children, The ending indicated that Alice (the child) was legally adopted by Annie's mother - has had therapy - and appears to be doing okay. There have been interviews on Dateline type shows with the children of spouse killers and most of them seem to have done okay if they were adopted by the mother's family (or father's family if applicable). Yes the experience would have shaped them but people can be resilient if given the opportunity and resources to heal.

I also saw the Dateline with the scammers you are referencing. I remember they were caught when both of them were scheduled for their VA appointments at the same time because they shared the wheel chair.

I think they also were doing a MAJOR scam (besides killing the woman's husband and making it look like a suicide) by claiming they were high level Army vets who were employed on ultra secret DOD missions. But I could be confusing them with another set of scammers who didn't pretend to be incapacitated but only killed and scammed.

[I Want My MBTV]

I know this shouldn't be my take away and I do feel horrible for Annie's family (especially little Alice) but for the life of me - how did Matt find 3 women to marry him?!  He has no job, no personality that I could see, no motivation to do anything and while I know looks aren't everything he didn't have those either.   Yet, he somehow found 3 women to marry him and 3 (separate?) women to have affairs with?   Is the male/female ration in Portland really that bad?  

Also, why did the state not see any red flags with all their kids being disabled?  Does no one ever go and check on these things?  Just like how did Matt get disability?  I've never applied but I'd think you'd have to have a doctor sign off and maybe get re-checked periodically?  Clearly I'm doing something wrong having an actual job (not as a professional parent).  

 

[Annber03]

2 hours ago, I Want My MBTV said:

I know this shouldn't be my take away and I do feel horrible for Annie's family (especially little Alice) but for the life of me - how did Matt find 3 women to marry him?!  He has no job, no personality that I could see, no motivation to do anything and while I know looks aren't everything he didn't have those either.   Yet, he somehow found 3 women to marry him and 3 (separate?) women to have affairs with?   Is the male/female ration in Portland really that bad?  

Right? These are questions I often find myself asking whenever I watch these kinds of shows. too. I truly don't get why so many women waste their time on guys like this. Or vice versa, for that matter. It's like it never occurs to them that they could just, y'know, be single for a change. 

Quote

Also, why did the state not see any red flags with all their kids being disabled?  Does no one ever go and check on these things?  Just like how did Matt get disability?  I've never applied but I'd think you'd have to have a doctor sign off and maybe get re-checked periodically?  Clearly I'm doing something wrong having an actual job (not as a professional parent).  

YES! God, when my dad was sick, my parents had to go through so much ridiculous red tape to even be considered for various kinds of aid, and he was never able to get disability, even though he was ill enough to the point where it would've been necessary, because of our family's income level (apparently we made "too much" to qualify, which was news to my mom, considering we were living paycheck to paycheck). 

Yet somehow these yahoos are able to get all this aid and nobody ever looks into or questions it, and they can scam the system for so long. And it's because of assholes like them that people like my parents have to jump through hoops, yet we're the ones who wind up getting hurt in the end much of the time. I don't get it. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

https://www.oxygen.com/accident-suicide-or-murder/crime-news/bob-mcclancy-murder-wife-responsible-faked-suicide

 

The Bob McClancy murder, with the second husband claiming credit for service in Vietnam, but he was another stolen valor case.   The wife of Bob, and later wife of her co-conspirator Chuck Kaczmarczyk also convicted. 

[amarante]

3 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Right? These are questions I often find myself asking whenever I watch these kinds of shows. too. I truly don't get why so many women waste their time on guys like this. Or vice versa, for that matter. It's like it never occurs to them that they could just, y'know, be single for a change. 

YES! God, when my dad was sick, my parents had to go through so much ridiculous red tape to even be considered for various kinds of aid, and he was never able to get disability, even though he was ill enough to the point where it would've been necessary, because of our family's income level (apparently we made "too much" to qualify, which was news to my mom, considering we were living paycheck to paycheck). 

Yet somehow these yahoos are able to get all this aid and nobody ever looks into or questions it, and they can scam the system for so long. And it's because of assholes like them that people like my parents have to jump through hoops, yet we're the ones who wind up getting hurt in the end much of the time. I don't get it. 

I don't know how these people snookered the system but in certain communities or circles there are people who *assist* others in terms of greasing the wheels. It isn't outright fraud but they know exactly how to present the evidence and have what I suspect is a *sympathetic* group or doctors or other professionals.

Same is true in terms of getting assistance for learning disabilities paid for. There is extremely high percentage of getting it in certain communities and much less success in other communities. Anecdotally there is a very high percentage of privileged kids who are able to get approved for additional time on standardized tests because of some type of learning disability 

[GiandujaPie]

I love this forum. You guys always say what I think too. What a bunch of losers Matt and Angela and their merry band of roommates are. And yeah, the whole pirates and polyamory thing was not really necessary as none of  it turned out to be relevant to the case, so it seemed to be there just for titillation. 

None of those people looked remotely appealing or attractive to me so I don't know how they had so many marriages, divorces and kids among them but I guess they attract each other. 

[12catcrazy]

22 hours ago, GiandujaPie said:

I love this forum. You guys always say what I think too. What a bunch of losers Matt and Angela and their merry band of roommates are. And yeah, the whole pirates and polyamory thing was not really necessary as none of  it turned out to be relevant to the case, so it seemed to be there just for titillation. 

None of those people looked remotely appealing or attractive to me so I don't know how they had so many marriages, divorces and kids among them but I guess they attract each other. 

You (and everybody else above) said it all - took the words out of my mouth.   And this episode reminded me of the photo of a  "Keep Portland Weird" bumper sticker somebody posted on my FB feed a few years back.   Portland seems, um, weird indeed.  

[JudyObscure]

"The Day the Music Died"

 I think Brenda may well have killed Buddy, but I just didn't like the reasons given by the prosecutor or the three jury women:

  So what if Brenda didn't break down in sobs when she heard the sordid details of the crime?  She was there, she's a nurse, and she's had three years to think about it so it was hardly news she was hearing for the first time. 

So what if she said that back door was always unlocked and Buddy told Clutch they kept it locked all the time?  If you asked my husband he would say we kept our doors locked all the time and I would say, "Nope.  Half the time they're unlocked because HE keeps forgetting to lock them."  Buddy slept downstairs, watching TV to all hours, probably drinking.  I would not be at all surprised if he routinely,  let the cat out, or went out for a smoke, and then forgot to lock the door.

So what if the shooter didn't steal anything?  If Dr. Buddy had made an enemy out of one of his fellow Civil War actors, or had an affair with one of his band's local groupies, or botched someone's plastic surgery, they might just want to come in and shoot him and leave. Any of those people might have been in the home at one time and known where the gun was kept or even heard Buddy or Brenda say where.

The motive about the tax business does give me pause, but I know, because my husband does hundreds of people's taxes every year, that it's not uncommon for someone to walk in with three or four years of taxes they just hadn't got around to doing.  Brenda may have naively thought she could get away with mess around and delay tactics with the IRS for ever.  I'd be happy to see her go to jail for tax fraud for a few years, but I wouldn't think that prospect would drive someone to murder.

I guess I just liked Brenda better than those smug jury-women who swallowed all the prosecutor's conjecture as if it was caught on camera.

[Annber03]

Buddy looked a lot like Mandy Patinkin. I just like that they named an episode about the death of someone named Buddy "The Day the Music Died".

I agree that just because people aren't breaking down in sobs when calling 911 or things of that sort, that doesn't automatically mean they're guilty. And good point about how easy it can be to forget the door one night, too. It's so easy to fall into such a routine that you think/assume you did something you always do, such as locking a door, when you didn't. 

But that stuff with the tax fraud did feel pretty damning to me. I can definitely see her being scared that her scheme is being revealed, and how Buddy might react to that, and killing him so he never had to know. Add in how sudden her selling of the business was, and how eager she was to try and destroy any documents, and how blasé she seemed to be about her husband's ashes, and the affair business (seriously, a possible financial motive and an affair, we're just walking right through the cliché checklist here with this episode, aren't we?) and I have no problem believing she played a role somehow. If she didn't kill him herself, I can buy that she knows who did. 

[pdlinda]

8 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I guess I just liked Brenda better than those smug jury-women who swallowed all the prosecutor's conjecture as if it was caught on camera.

I was curious regarding the lack of physical evidence on Brenda.  No GSR and that included the clothing she was wearing the night of the murder.

I thought from the way things were framed that she, indeed, might have panicked about getting caught up with the tax fraud situation and, who knows, maybe Buddy had other infidelities, or whatever, and she decided to HIRE someone to kill him.  The placement of the murder weapon outside the house in such an obvious place also gave me pause.  Why would she be so careless?

However, I admit there didn't seem to be any evidence of a hired killer. 

My bet is that there will be some appellate lawyer who will find some technical error in the trial and a new trial will be ordered.  Who knows??  

[Ohmo]

8 hours ago, Annber03 said:

But that stuff with the tax fraud did feel pretty damning to me. I can definitely see her being scared that her scheme is being revealed, and how Buddy might react to that, and killing him so he never had to know. Add in how sudden her selling of the business was, and how eager she was to try and destroy any documents, and how blasé she seemed to be about her husband's ashes, and the affair business (seriously, a possible financial motive and an affair, we're just walking right through the cliché checklist here with this episode, aren't we?) and I have no problem believing she played a role somehow. If she didn't kill him herself, I can buy that she knows who did. 

I think she did it, too.  She was trying too hard.  Her "junkie" story felt wildly out of place.  I don't have any direct personal experiences with anyone dealing with addiction, but from what I've just generally heard through media stories and such, someone dealing with addiction may steal opportunistically, but a random stranger is not going to go through a neighborhood hoping a back door is going to be open.  That story clearly felt to me like a story she believed the police would buy.

I think she did it herself.  The gun was small---like one that a woman could handle.

[Ohmo]

9 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I guess I just liked Brenda better than those smug jury-women who swallowed all the prosecutor's conjecture as if it was caught on camera.

I had the opposite reaction.  I thought Brenda was busy trying to sell that "Sweet Older Southern Belle" routine to the cops until the cows came home.

The woman who did all of the embezzling, not paying taxes, closing the practice immediately---that was the REAL Brenda, in my opinion, and she was trying not to get caught.

[Josiemae]

I'm always suspicious when someone is murdered with a gun that just happens to be in the house. I mean, a criminal is going to bring his own weapon, not rely on chance that there is one available that also happens to be loaded. That just never passes the smell test.

The second red flag is when absolutely nothing is taken.

The poor guy was executed while he was sleeping. What stranger would do that?

This was one lame home invasion scenario. (And we've seen a lot of them.)

 

 

 

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, Ohmo said:

I think she did it, too.  She was trying too hard.  Her "junkie" story felt wildly out of place.  I don't have any direct personal experiences with anyone dealing with addiction, but from what I've just generally heard through media stories and such, someone dealing with addiction may steal opportunistically, but a random stranger is not going to go through a neighborhood hoping a back door is going to be open.  That story clearly felt to me like a story she believed the police would buy.

Your thoughts on the junkie story are mine. Yes. It's like that one woman said during the episode, she seemed to have answers ready for questions she hadn't even been asked yet. She was already throwing out theories as to who might've done this before the police even got to that part of their talk with her. And if it was a junkie, a stranger, who'd done this, well...how'd they know where the gun was, and how to get to it? 

Even if we go with the theory that it could've been someone Brenda and Buddy knew who killed him, okay, sure, I can buy a family friend knowing where they kept their gun. That makes sense. But even taking that into account, it'd still be quite the risk for them to sneak in, find the place where the gun is kept, retrieve it (and I can't remember, was it kept in a safe or locked someplace? 'Cause if so, unless they knew how to crack the safe/box open, that would add to their difficulties in getting to the gun), and then sneak back to kill Buddy, all without waking anyone in the process until after the gun went off.

And whether the supposed intruder was a stranger or a friend, if somebody's going to go to that much effort to sneak into a house, using a gun, and not making any effort to muffle the gunshot besides, that seems rather counterproductive, does it not? It's not out of the realm of possibility, mind, we know that criminals often don't think through every part of their plan beforehand and whatnot. Just that it'd make their efforts to be covert rather pointless, I would think. 

1 hour ago, Ohmo said:

I had the opposite reaction.  I thought Brenda was busy trying to sell that "Sweet Older Southern Belle" routine to the cops until the cows came home.

The woman who did all of the embezzling, not paying taxes, closing the practice immediately---that was the REAL Brenda, in my opinion, and she was trying not to get caught.

Agreed. 

I just kept wondering what that staff at the practice must've been thinking while all this craziness was going on with the place being sold off and everything The show mentioned how they were all very cooperative with the investigation, which is good, but man... I wonder if they kept up with the case, and what they must've thought when Brenda was named the main suspect. 

And how does one even begin to explain that on their resume when looking for their next job? What do you even say or put down when the prospective interviewer asks why you left your previous job? "Uh...well...see, my boss was murdered, and there was an investigation, and..." 

Edited May 15, 2022 by Annber03

[JudyObscure]

In this town we've had an eye doctor and a GP die suddenly and we all took it for granted that the office would immediately close.  What else can they do?  Brenda was eager to go home to her family and she couldn't do it until she got her ducks in a row, as office manager she would be the only person to do it.

Also, one reason Brenda kept coming up with lame ideas about junkies, was that the police kept grilling her for ideas all night long, to the point where she was saying, "I don't know, I just don't know.  You're the detectives, not me." and told them they were making her mad.

I keep thinking the doctor might have been having an affair, then dumped the woman and she came to the house, got the kitchen gun he had told her about, and killed him.

[I'm just playing devil's advocate here.  Brenda probably did it.  I just have to defend anyone who goes down because they don't cry enough in the court room..  That would be me, because I'm incapable of  crying in public.]

[iMonrey]

Quote

[I'm just playing devil's advocate here.  Brenda probably did it.  I just have to defend anyone who goes down because they don't cry enough in the court room..  That would be me, because I'm incapable of  crying in public.]

I thought she sounded genuine during the 911 call and during the initial interrogation. But maybe she's just a really good actress. I'm not sure I would have voted to convict, the physical evidence wasn't there and I thought the motive was fairly weak.

[pdlinda]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I thought she sounded genuine during the 911 call and during the initial interrogation. But maybe she's just a really good actress. I'm not sure I would have voted to convict, the physical evidence wasn't there and I thought the motive was fairly weak.

I AGREE with YOU in this instance.  

With our legal system, the question is NOT whether Brenda committed the crime or not, The question is whether the STATE proved her guilt BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

In this case, there was circumstantial evidence that she did it and I think she may have killed Buddy; HOWEVER, I thought it was "reasonable" that someone else might have done it (whether at her instruction, or not).

I don't think the State met its burden of proof that Brenda killed Buddy beyond a reasonable doubt.

Maybe some appellate defense lawyer will take on her case and get the conviction reversed or, at least, get Brenda a new trial.

 

[Cozytea]

I think Brenda did it. However I definitely can see Brenda winning an appeal the future. The evidence was not very strong. 

One thing I wondered,  why did he sleep in the living room? I don't mean why do a husband and wife sleep separately,  I know a few couples that sleep in separate rooms, for many reasons especially as they got older. I wonder why he didn't have his own Room in that huge house? It's not important lol.

[Ohmo]

5 hours ago, pdlinda said:

With our legal system, the question is NOT whether Brenda committed the crime or not, The question is whether the STATE proved her guilt BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

As I believe, TVBitch once said, at some point, the fact that he's dead has to be taken into account.  Not all crimes are going to have video or DNA or anything that lights up and says "This person did it."

Buddy is dead, and he didn't die by suicide.

They had no children.

There was no forced entry, and nothing was taken.

The gun used was once kept in a kitchen drawer, which only someone who lived in that house was likely to know.

The affair that Buddy had had been over for years, and the cops had to tell the husband, which means he didn't know.  The mistress was cleared, and she'd have no reason to kill Buddy if she had gotten away with the affair to this point.

Brenda was about to be exposed for embezzling from the business.

The gun was found on their property.

The 911 call was when she said that this had just happened.  That could not be corroborated in any other way.  She could have shot him, and then cleaned herself up before calling 911.

Reasonable doubt has been satisfied, in my opinion.  There was nothing that was ever found that excluded Brenda, and all reasonable scenarios involve her, including the possibility that she paid someone to do it.

Sometimes, with the available evidence that is presented, you have to factor in that someone did this.  All the reasonable scenarios involve Brenda.

I certainly hope she isn't granted a new trial.  Jurors have to be allowed to reasonably use critical thinking skills.

Edited May 15, 2022 by Ohmo

[12catcrazy]

I agree with everything that Ohmo said above.  Just makes more sense that Brenda would kill her husband than anybody else.   Especially with a gun kept in a kitchen drawer (don't we all have junk drawers with scotch tape, broken rubber bands, various pens that don't work, and .. guns!) 

Actually, I really want more of a deep dive into Brenda and Buddy's marriage.   Dateline kind of alluded to it with all of the stuff about he wanted to do this and that and the other thing and she always went along with it.   You really have to wonder about the possible amount of simmering resentment this woman had for years, and I think that it probably was the tax audit/investigation that finally made her crack.  

My guess is that she was a very passive-aggressive type of person and rarely (if ever) actually blew up in anger at her husband.  Maybe he was a domineering jerk (they didn't seem to interview any of his employees) and she learned to go along to get along.   And why didn't they have children?  Was is a choice that they both made (if they couldn't have their own, there could be adoption) or was it HIS choice?   just lots of questions that could possibly be a clue in why she did what she did.  

And did anybody think that she looked much more stylish when she was arrested than she did while her husband was still alive?   She looked better with the short grey hair than she did with that dowdy dyed long hair with bangs.   Maybe she finally felt "free" - women's hair can say a lot.  

[ButterQueen]

On 5/3/2022 at 9:06 PM, chick binewski said:

Oh dear Oxygen is airing The Carrollton Plot right now. Clicking away to avoid rage-posting.

UGH but not soon enough to escape that deeply obnoxious overly-rehearsed daughter!

Most obnoxious people interviewed; Kandi Hall a close second.

[ButterQueen]

On 5/15/2022 at 5:10 PM, Ohmo said:

As I believe, TVBitch once said, at some point, the fact that he's dead has to be taken into account.  Not all crimes are going to have video or DNA or anything that lights up and says "This person did it."

Buddy is dead, and he didn't die by suicide.

They had no children.

There was no forced entry, and nothing was taken.

The gun used was once kept in a kitchen drawer, which only someone who lived in that house was likely to know.

The affair that Buddy had had been over for years, and the cops had to tell the husband, which means he didn't know.  The mistress was cleared, and she'd have no reason to kill Buddy if she had gotten away with the affair to this point.

Brenda was about to be exposed for embezzling from the business.

The gun was found on their property.

The 911 call was when she said that this had just happened.  That could not be corroborated in any other way.  She could have shot him, and then cleaned herself up before calling 911.

Reasonable doubt has been satisfied, in my opinion.  There was nothing that was ever found that excluded Brenda, and all reasonable scenarios involve her, including the possibility that she paid someone to do it.

Sometimes, with the available evidence that is presented, you have to factor in that someone did this.  All the reasonable scenarios involve Brenda.

I certainly hope she isn't granted a new trial.  Jurors have to be allowed to reasonably use critical thinking skills.

You stated my take on this case perfectly.  I watched it with my sister, who also agreed with the jury.

[TVbitch]

Rerun Alert! Robert Neulander case. An update in the last 20 minutes.

Thought maybe the second jury was not going to find him guilty, since like with Brenda and Buddy, there is no smoking gun. Poor kids are standing by him. His explanation for dragging her 50 feet will never fly. He says he wanted to check her coloring. Uh huh ...are there no lights in the bathroom? You just thought she would look her best in natural lighting? I mean, I'm not a doctor, but I think in an emergency, a focus on heartbeat, breathing and staunching blood loss is more important than dragging someone 50 feet to check their complexion. 

[iMonrey]

I knew I'd seen the Neulander case before. 

I'm not convinced he's guilty. I think far too much is being made of the fact that he moved her body. If she fell in the shower it would make sense to carry her out of the bathroom and onto the bed to perform CPR. She might have been in a really awkward position in the bathroom which made it difficult or impossible to take care of here there. And they did establish that Leslie suffered from vertigo.

Jenna was there and she didn't think anything was suspicious. Neither did the initial medical examiner. It's only the two friends who started raising questions without having been there in the first place. And that Starbucks guy was sketchy as hell, he definitely seemed like he had an agenda.

The motive really wasn't there either. So he had some money troubles, yeah that's always a red flag but it doesn't sound like killing his wife would have solved that problem. And we have only the word of Leslie's "friends" she was planning to leave him. Also, the sergeant and the detective didn't seem too bright. Anyone who thinks you have to be smart to be a detective hasn't watched enough Dateline.

Good grief, that news reporter lady, Megan, had the worst vocal fry ever. Can't believe she's on TV. And did anyone else think Andrea looked a little puffy during the early interviews? Maybe it was just the pink lipstick against her pasty face, but she looked more normal during the latter part of the episode so it seemed like something was going on.

[Mondrianyone]

Just now, iMonrey said:

And that Starbucks guy was sketchy as hell, he definitely seemed like he had an agenda.

I dozed off at some point. Was the suggestion that she was leaving the marriage to be with Starbucks guy? That seemed very unlikely to me for various reasons.

Just now, iMonrey said:

And did anyone else think Andrea looked a little puffy during the early interviews?

She might have been pregnant in the early interviews, since they took place years ago. But her blusher looked radioactive. Don't they have a makeup artist on Dateline?

[amarante]

On 5/15/2022 at 1:23 PM, Cozytea said:

I think Brenda did it. However I definitely can see Brenda winning an appeal the future. The evidence was not very strong. 

One thing I wondered,  why did he sleep in the living room? I don't mean why do a husband and wife sleep separately,  I know a few couples that sleep in separate rooms, for many reasons especially as they got older. I wonder why he didn't have his own Room in that huge house? It's not important lol.

As I recall someone said he slept there because he had trouble sleeping and the television put him to sleep. As someone who has used the television to put me to sleep on a sofa I can understand this. Typically you would have a television in the bedroom and one in the family room. 

There was a case on Forensic Files where the wife killed the husband when it was just about to be disclosed that she had failed to pay any kind of taxes including payroll taxes for a significant period of time. And just like this murder, there was some kind of interview with tax authorities scheduled for the next day or very soon so discovery would have been unavoidable. I think in that one - or it could have been another wife killing a husband - the wife also disposed of all of the personal effects almost immediately. 

If I were on the jury I would have voted to convict. The standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't mean that absolutely no other explanation can be *tortured* into argument. The doubt has to be "reasonable" - beyond a "reasonable doubt". 

With all due respect to other posters, I think all of the theories of some random person - or even a friend with a grudge - choosing to execute a sleeping person on a sofa during the night and not even attempt to steal ANYTHING is not *reasonable" because it flies in the face of human or criminal behavior. 

 

[Irlandesa]

2 hours ago, iMonrey said:

If she fell in the shower it would make sense to carry her out of the bathroom and onto the bed to perform CPR.

I've always been iffy on conviction based on the few details these shows provide but as a doctor, he should know that a bed is not where CPR should be performed. In fact, it's recommended to move someone from the bed to the floor to perform CPR if they're found on a bed.

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

I've always been iffy on conviction based on the few details these shows provide but as a doctor, he should know that a bed is not where CPR should be performed. In fact, it's recommended to move someone from the bed to the floor to perform CPR if they're found on a bed.

This. I could perhaps understand him moving her out of the shower right onto the bathroom floor, if he felt he could get a better angle/better lighting/whatever that way. Still risky, but it's a very short distance and if it gives him better access to examine her, fine, whatever. 

But carrying her all the way into a whole other room, especially with all that blood dripping about, to the point where it's not just on the floor, but the walls and other various items (and that's presuming that the blood on the walls and such was the result of him carrying her, and not whatever else might've happened between them prior to that)? Yeah. No. Even if the injury is the result of an accidental fall, at that point, you have to know that you're just making the situation worse and hastening the chances of her dying before the paramedics arrive. If people who aren't doctors can realize the danger in moving someone's body that far after an injury, it makes it harder to buy the actual doctor's reasons for doing so. 

Edited May 21, 2022 by Annber03

[Ohmo]

5 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Jenna was there and she didn't think anything was suspicious

That house was 8,000 square feet or so.  When 48 Hours did the episode, they said Jenna was in the house at the time, but not close to their bedroom.  She wouldn't have any idea what happened.  All she saw was the result.

I think he did it.  The blood by the bed makes sense if he was trying to revive her, but the blood everywhere else reads chase to me, as though he struck her, and she tried to get away.  It was on baseboards in big drips and spots, not something that can be explained away as EMT behavior or the "bloody T-shirt" claim.   48 Hours said he claimed  his shirt was bloody from working on her, so he took it off.  The process of taking it off caused the blood spatter, he said.

I don't buy that either.   There's too much blood in the room.  48 Hours discussed a theory where he kills her, goes for his run, and tosses the shirt.  This defense has never produced this mysterious shirt.  I think he's back where he belongs and was lucky to get the three-ish years of freedom that he did.

[ButterQueen]

IMO, Dr Neulander is guilty.  All the blood on the walls, bed, night stand and headboard, plus her tissue imbedded in the headboard is telling.  No way she died in the shower.  Also, she was divorcing her husband.  She told her Starbuck’s friend.

[MooCat Pretzel]

Why does it seem like there has been nonstop episodes of Dateline that rehash an old story with an update in the last 10 minutes?  Have we run out of original, twisty true crimes?!

And more importantly, why does Andrea wear too much makeup?!  

Edited May 22, 2022 by MooCat Pretzel

[amarante]

If I am not mistaken this is at least the third doctor who has bludgeoned his wife and claimed it was an accidental fall in the shower.

There was a doctor whose wife was recovering from plastic surgery she had at his urging but as I recall the daughters were behind trying to get him convicted

There was a doctor who bludgeoned his wife on Valentine's Day in between surgeries and was convicted - in part - because he had failed to change his shoes when he discarded the other bloody clothing.

[UsernameFatigue]

13 hours ago, iMonrey said:

 

. And we have only the word of Leslie's "friends" she was planning to leave him.

 

The detective said that numerous friends told them that the Neulanders were divorcing. Her friend Terri said it in the interviews as well, and the Starbucks friend said that Leslie told him that she and Neulander had sat down all the children and told them that they were divorcing. A pretty easy thing to disprove if it wasn't true, and I don't think either Neulander or the kids disputed it. 

I have no doubt he was guilty. Jenna herself said in the 911 call how much blood there was, but at that point her dad was still in the bathroom moving her mother so supposedly had not even been to the bedroom as yet with Leslie.

I find the bed/head board interesting as I don't remember Neulander saying that he put Leslie there at one point to do CPR. Jenna said she never saw her mother on the bed. Neulander did move Leslie a couple of times in the bedroom but AFAIK the bed was never mentioned. In the pictures of the crime scene, the bed has a pillow on the right hand side, a pillow in the middle against the headboard and blankets and a pillow against the headboard on the left hand side. Where the pillows were against the head board is where the blood was, and wasn't seen by the detectives originally because the blood was covered by the pillows. If Neulander did CPR on the bed, presumably he would have removed pillows etc, not lie Leslie down on an uneven surface to do CPR. 

I wondered why the prosecution didn't call Jenna as a witness in the second trial? Would they not have had that option when the defense didn't call her (for obvious reasons) given that Jenna was there and is on the 911 call? In any case thank goodness the second jury agreed with the first one, and Neulander is where he should be, once again. 

[MsJamieDornan]

14 hours ago, iMonrey said:

I'm not convinced he's guilty. I think far too much is being made of the fact that he moved her body

For some odd reason, I thought the ending was going to be that the daughter killed the mother and the father was taking the blame. Guess not.

[amarante]

13 hours ago, MooCat Pretzel said:

Why does it seem like there has been nonstop episodes of Dateline that rehash an old story with an update in the last 10 minutes?  Have we run out of original, twisty true crimes?!

And more importantly, why does Andrea wear too much makeup?!  

It is not just the makeup although this episode her makeup seems to be clownish with the heavy blush.

It is also that whatever plastic surgery or procedures she is having done make her face look freakishly smooth. It looks like when someone has too many procedures AND uses heavy filters and photoshopping 

[iMonrey]

Quote

IMO, Dr Neulander is guilty.  All the blood on the walls, bed, night stand and headboard, plus her tissue imbedded in the headboard is telling.

He may well be guilty but all the blood doesn't prove anything to me. Even a minor cut to the head can result in buckets of blood, as someone who has experienced head injuries up close can tell you. There's something about the scalp that makes it shoot blood projectile style.

I also don't think the fact that Neulander is a doctor suggests any nefarious action on his part. He's not a trauma surgeon, he's a plastic surgeon, and in the moment of panic and confusion I could easily see him moving his wife around, at first not realizing she's dead and just thinking maybe she's knocked out. 

For me, the smoking gun is missing. Did anyone say Leslie claimed he was violent or was afraid he was going to kill her? At most it must have been an accident, I don't think he'd deliberately kill his wife with his daughter in the house.

[ButterQueen]

In the Neulander case, the motive was the divorce.  They were in deep financial trouble.  He was losing most of his practice due to BC/BS pulling out due to “billing errors”.

I’ll sit at a table for one, sipping a strawberry daiquiri, but Andrea is growing on me.  I love her wardrobe and especially her jewelry.

[mythoughtis]

In Leslie’s daughter’s original statement to the police, she told them that she touched her mom’s jaw and it was stiff.  Rigor Morris occurs at least a couple hours after death.  Not while someone is warm and possibly breathing and you perform CPR.  Nor should there be blood all over the bedroom before  you have moved your wife there from the bathroom.   
He killed her, probably by accident, stages the scene and called to his daughter when he heard her so he would have ‘a witness’.   
his practice was closed, his marriage was crumbling.  There was probably an argument and he struck out without thinking. 

[ButterQueen]

Not to mention, he had two trials.  Guilty on both.

[ButterQueen]

I was impressed by the DA’s daughter noticing blood all over the nightstand, but none on the pristine white mug of coffee Dr Neulander admitted putting there after his walk….his walk to discard the murder weapon.  I believe they didn’t share a bedroom.

[howiveaddict]

On 5/21/2022 at 1:24 PM, Irlandesa said:

I've always been iffy on conviction based on the few details these shows provide but as a doctor, he should know that a bed is not where CPR should be performed. In fact, it's recommended to move someone from the bed to the floor to perform CPR if they're found on a bed.

Exactly!