All Episodes Discussion

[Hank3]

Came across another good episode from 2013 - Under the Desert Sky:

 

[ari333]

I know this was a repeat and realized I had seen it when I saw the neon yellow hoodie on the floor. Anyway, I forgot the story, so I watched again. I cant believe the mom just sat quietly after the person left the room after the red laser was pointed at her.

[Hank3]

One memorable episode, IMO, was the one about Mark Twitchell.  He was (ultimately) convicted of murder in the death of Johnny Altinger, but the episode centered on his attack on Gilles Tetreault. The episode focused on how Tetreault was lured  to Twitchell's house by using the website PlentyofFish (expecting a date with a woman), then was attacked by a Twitchell in a mask with a stun baton. And then the police discovered a document, entitled "SKConfessions," which detailed Twitchell's planning, first attempt, and successful second attempt at murdering a man by luring him to his garage using fake online profiles (complete with the process of dismembering the victim's body). And the fact that Keith Morrison did this story made it even creepier.

 

The episode was titled, "Deadly House of Cards."  I watched it recently and it was a indeed a good one.  I became a Dateline fan about a year ago, watching reruns.  But now am hooked.  I've caught up on all of 2014 and 2015 episodes and slowly working on the 2013 seasons if they're available online.     

https://vimeo.com/102973133

[One Tough Cookie]

I can't with Dateline anymore, at least the Friday night episodes.  IMO they take a story that can be told AT MOST for 1 hour and become so repetitive, I lose interest.  When they come to ID, they generally more watchable in the hour format.  But commit to a two hour episode?  Can't do it.

[iscoffy]

WOW, what a dumb criminal! Everything she did that she thought pointed to someone else instead pointed directly back to her. It would have been hilariously, laughably bad if it weren't so sad for Frank and his loved ones.

 

 

I also just watched this on ID for the first time. She was really not at all clever, although she obviously thought she was.  She really thought that somehow "guessing" the types of poison that killed her poor husband would deflect police attention from her and get her the insurance money faster?  A truly horrible and stupid person, on every level.  Good acting job from the policeman who had to pretend to be shocked by her made-up stuff they knew that Chad didn't say on the call at all, since they were on it too.

[psychoticstate]

I've seen many, many of these types of shows and I wanted to punch this bitch in the throat more than anyone else (that says a lot.)  I caught this on repeat and I knew almost from the beginning that the wife would be guilty because Dateline kept showing her picture and the wedding picture.  Duh. 

 

Thank goodness Angelina wasn't nearly as smart as she thinks and she was so damn greedy - - that greed kept her pushing for an official cause of death so the insurance company could get the precious death certificate and pay her out.  Did she not realize that she would immediately become suspect number one because she was Frank's wife?  That's Murder 101.  And the police would obviously check for life insurance, especially given they had been married a hot minute after knowing each other for something like two months.   I hope the life insurance proceeds went to Frank's sisters.

 

I have no doubt this bitch killed her baby daughter for the money.  She is the textbook example of a cold, cruel sociopath.  No real feelings for anyone else, others are merely means to help her get what she wants. 

 

Don't let me down, California.  Execute this snake.

[ari333]

I never know whether to comment here or start a new thread for an eppy. Maybe I'm dim, but this eppy, "Plot Twist" from last night 1 15 16, had me guessing and saying WTH?

 

I agree that some stories are kind of telegraphed and it's too easy to read the outcome. However, this one did have plot twists and surprise turns imo.

Edited January 16, 2016 by ari333

[FanOfTheFans]

The episode Plot Twist, had me guessing the outcome too. Very strange people. I think the fiancé is more involved than she is letting on but I don't see that they will be able to prove it unless the murderer talks. But boy what a weird guy. Just creepy.

[patty1h]

I agree with the poster who said that Dateline drags most of these stories out tooo looong.  Instead of waiting an hour for the big reveal, my M.O. is to go onto the internet as soon as I get the names of the players and find the details of the case.  I then decide to watch or bail, depending on if the case is compelling.  I also have a love/hate relationship with these types of shows; I hate how they show how horrible people can be, but I love when the MFers are busted and justice is done.  That part is my happy place.

 

That creep from Plot Twist needs to fry so bad.  I want him to die screaming.  He killed two people so he could have a nice wedding!  That is so horrific.  He's too good to go to City Hall.   I just can't make up my mind about the fiancee.

[Sparkle]

I can't with Dateline anymore, at least the Friday night episodes.  IMO they take a story that can be told AT MOST for 1 hour and become so repetitive, I lose interest.  When they come to ID, they generally more watchable in the hour format.  But commit to a two hour episode?  Can't do it.

I have to say I agree. I watch it more on ID or even TLC and OWN than I do on NBC anymore. Longer ones I'll watch when they go up on Youtube and skip to the end if it gets too repetitive or dull. That being said, some of my favorites were 2 hour episodes (Russell Williams, Lydia/Kenia, and Mistaken Identity). But most of them really don't need to be that long.  

[A.Ham]

Re: Plot twist

Yeah, I think poor man's Anna Faris was more involved than she lets on, she keeps playing the "innocent" card but I don't believe her one bit. She is not as great an actress as she thinks she is. She and her psychopath fiancée were definitely odd ducks. Even during their recorded phone call from jail, her responses appeared to be selective in case she was being recorded. Her whole "we don't need money, we just need to be good people" thing sounded more like what she thought people would want to hear rather than what she believed. It just came across as fake to me.

I did think that as twisty as the story was, it could have been told in 1 hour. They really did drag this out--I actually fell asleep watching it and did not finish it until today.

I had actually initially considered the possibility that Sam was dead instead of on the run. But I gave up on that theory once he started looking fairly guilty, which I guess was the whole point of creepy actor's plan, even if I thought creepy actor had been involved. So sad for the parents of both victims, losing their children to greed and evil. Also, infuriating that someone who sacrificed for this country selflessly would be targeted and savagely disposed of by someone who couldn't deign to get a real job to support himself. It's nauseating.

[ari333]

The episode Plot Twist, had me guessing the outcome too. Very strange people. I think the fiancé is more involved than she is letting on but I don't see that they will be able to prove it unless the murderer talks. But boy what a weird guy. Just creepy.

Dan, the actor , gave me super creepy chills, but the fiancée gave me the willies for real... especially the stone face she had when she talked. Wow.

[FanOfTheFans]

Dan, the actor , gave me super creepy chills, but the fiancée gave me the willies for real... especially the stone face she had when she talked. Wow.

Yes something was definitely off with her. I think when I heard she posted on the dead girl's Facebook the day she was murdered, I felt she was involved. Didn't they say she hadn't posted on her Facebook for a long time and then coincidently she happens to post that day. Another case of stupid criminals. Plus her brother was involved with hiding evidence. Just weird all the way around.

The murderer seemed amused when they brought him into court for his verdict. Did you see the smirk on his face walking in? I think he was enjoying being on stage again so to speak. The guy is a total psychopath. I think the girlfriend is right behind him too. She also had too flat of an affect through the whole ordeal, especially when the cops were in the interrogation room with her. She did not seem surprised by anything they were telling her.

Edited for spelling

Edited January 16, 2016 by FanOfTheFans

[Morbs]

I think Plot Twist was new so it needs its own thread.

I absolutely loved the teenager, "My balls were on the inside I was shitting my pants." How did the killer really expect to keep making withdrawals until he got all 60,000? They were brain dead. I think he was about to try for an insanity plea but then figured out that wouldn't work so he was fucked by the time Lockup interviewed him.

She seemed in on it to me just because of her tone during her interviews, like how she started saying the killer got a lot roles but then again it's easy for guys to lead roles in community theater especially if they have booming voices. Everything about her just seemed off and dead inside.

And damn, the male victim was such a stud.

Edited January 16, 2016 by Morbs

[FanOfTheFans]

And just want to add, sympathy to the victims families. And bless his soul for his service to our country. I have a ton of respect for vets. My father, my daughter, and my son in law are all army and have sacrificed for this country. My Father is no longer living, but my daughter carries on the tradition as well as her husband.

What a horrible death the victims suffered. Just awful.

[BusyOctober]

Re. Plot Twist...so the motive for double murder was $60k?? I kept waiting to hear the killer's reason and I'm not satisfied that is it. I'm not saying ANY amount of money is a good enough reason to shoot and dismember one's friends, but $60 grand wouldn't stretch very far even if the actor and his fiancée got away with it. I thought at the end of the story they would reveal the killer and his GF were both cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. Like, they had some dual delusion of creating a real life drama they could write, direct and star in and become famous.

Too many questions unanswered (per usual for Dateline IMO). If she were an accomplice, why wouldn't the BF tell the cops?

[glowlights]

Did anyone else see the episode from about two weeks ago, about a Montana veterinarian who was found shot in his house and it was automatically ruled a suicide, so most of the evidence was destroyed before state police could get there? Because I have questions...

[Major Bigtime]

Did anyone else see the episode from about two weeks ago, about a Montana veterinarian who was found shot in his house and it was automatically ruled a suicide, so most of the evidence was destroyed before state police could get there? Because I have questions...

Yes I saw that, same here.

[Fable]

This Plot Twist bothers me.  I think Dan's motive for supposedly killing Sam was lame, and I don't like that investigators lied to get a confession.  Nothing pisses me off more than cops trying to get a confession using deceptive methods.  Did he do it?  He may well have, and I really have no idea, but this boys and girls, is why you never talk to the police without a lawyer!

Edited January 17, 2016 by Fable

[glowlights]

Yes I saw that, same here.

 

Okay! So here's the thing: it was 2 hours and my attention wanders when the eps are so drawn out, even if Keith Morrison is reporting. But I'm pretty sure they played the 911 call at the beginning of the ep, and the house owner was the one who called. And she was calmly telling the dispatcher that the veterinarian had shot himself and her husband had found him. And then later we find out of course it was NOT a suicide, but cops had not questioned the original story of "Oh gee, he shot himself, nothing to see here!" and so they just wiped up all the evidence and removed his body.

 

Did you hear the same thing in the 911 call, or am I misremembering?

[Jpxfactor]

Yes the 911 caller said he shot himself.

[UsernameFatigue]

I was surprised that the ex boyfriend was convicted of killing the veterinarian when it was years later and there was no new evidence. I really wondered if the girlfriend herself was the killer. The veterinarian really didn't seem as enamoured with her as she was with him. He was from what I remember a dozen years older than her and they hardly seemed to have much in common. On top of that he was seeing other women. I found it interesting that they found in his autopsy that he had recently had intercourse, given that he had just returned from a conference. Maybe she found out and flipped out? I thought even years after the murder that the girlfriend was odd.

[David T. Cole]

I never know whether to comment here or start a new thread for an eppy.

 

Why? New episode, new episode topic. Please use the episode topic format in the editor when you do. This show's episode topics are a mess.

[Ina123]

I loved this episode. It's the one where the murderer is an actor in community theatre about to get married.

 

He was a most unusual suspect. For all intents and purposes, he was just a normal guy about to get married to his dream girl. Yet, instead of going out and getting a decent job or two, he decides to kill a friend who has $60,000. He kills the guy's best friend, frames him for it and then not only kills him but mutilates the body. This episode had it all.

 

OK, folks. Was the girlfriend in on it?

 

I'm just glad he was caught because he was a serial killer in the making.

[Janc]

Wow that was rather disturbing, wasn't it?  I do think the girlfriend knows more than she let on, but what's keeping Dan from spilling the beans about her involvement now? She was way too calm in the confession video.  What doesn't make sense is the reason that he killed to get the $60K to pay for the wedding, when Rachel says her parents were paying for the wedding? And how did he not think the bank card would be traced? 

[Miss Chevious]

I saw that episode too. Dan definitely had delusions of grandeur. He obviously didn't think about the fact bank ATMs have security cameras and the trail would lead police back to him. And I too think the fiancée knew more than she let on.

[Janc]

Oh, forgot to add - I think he was itching to be released for the wedding so that his accomplice (Rachel) would have immunity from testifying against him!  Surprised he didn't try to plead insanity.  

[Ina123]

I don't think he meant for the money to go toward the wedding. He just wanted it for starting their life together. Lazy pig.

[ElleBee]

I saw that episode too. Dan definitely had delusions of grandeur. He obviously didn't think about the fact bank ATMs have security cameras and the trail would lead police back to him. And I too think the fiancée knew more than she let on.

 

Even more amazing is that his delusions of grandeur extended all the way to his self-perceived Oscar-worthy community theater acting skills, since part of the plan was that he would "charm" the police into thinking he wasn't involved. Um no.

 

I wasn't sure on the fiancee's involvement. It seems likely that she had an idea, especially once her brother got peripherally folded in. But when they had their taped jailhouse conversation, and she told Dan that she was going to call the police, if she'd been involved I would think he would have had more of a "Well, if you rat me out, then I'm going to rat you out too" or at least a "Are you *sure* you want to do that? <hint, hint>" reaction than just responding with (paraphrasing) "Well, if you do then I'm screwed." 

[Janc]

But when they had their taped jailhouse conversation, and she told Dan that she was going to call the police, if she'd been involved I would think he would have had more of a "Well, if you rat me out, then I'm going to rat you out too" or at least a "Are you *sure* you want to do that? <hint, hint>" reaction than just responding with (paraphrasing) "Well, if you do then I'm screwed." 

 

Good point.   Just discovered this blog, from someone who knew Daniel before the murders who got back in touch with him in jail:  http://danielwozniakismyfriend.com/  

[RedheadZombie]

I found it interesting that the four mains had varying degrees of arrested development.  Sam is a twenty-six year old veteran with $60,000 sitting in his bank account, yet he shares a checking account with his father and attends community college where he requires a tutor.   Julie is five or six years out of high school, is attending community college when most of her classmates have probably graduated university a couple of years ago, aspires to a somewhat unrealistic career of fashion, literally died wearing a tiara, has a mother who still waits up for her at the age of twenty-three, and her mother hopes she'll live at home forever.  Dan and Rachel devote their lives to unpaid community theatre starring roles (and the adulation that entails), have little to no income, yet decide to get married.  Their lifestyles had to be enabled by their parents' support.

 

She seemed in on it to me just because of her tone during her interviews, like how she started saying the killer got a lot roles but then again it's easy for guys to lead roles in community theater especially if they have booming voices. Everything about her just seemed off and dead inside.

 

I haven't completely decided where I stand on her involvement, but I'm leaning towards either knew nothing, or found out after the fact.  Her affect in the interview could be influenced by over preparation by her attorney, a healthy dose of anti-anxiety medicine, or both.  The only things I found suspicious were her use of "Sam's having family problems" story (which she may simply be repeating from what Dan told her), and the fact that she originally denied seeing Sam that day.  But I don't think she would have brazenly confronted Dan on a monitored call when she wasn't sure of how he would respond.  It's likely that he would have incriminated her somehow.  I wonder if she was immediately suspicious of him, therefore not so shocked when he confessed.  She immediately distanced herself from him by cancelling the wedding versus simply postponing.  And in the interview, she downplays her feelings for him - he was more attracted to her, she didn't love him prior to living with him, and she wasn't wildly in love, which she was "OK" with.

 

Even more amazing is that his delusions of grandeur extended all the way to his self-perceived Oscar-worthy community theater acting skills, since part of the plan was that he would "charm" the police into thinking he wasn't involved. Um no.

 

I actually found the police rather clueless.  Up until the moment of Dan's confession, they stubbornly insisted that Sam killed Julie, and Dan was simply hiding Sam.  Even after the ATM teenager was found, they simply shifted the theory to - ATM teen is working for Sam via Dan.  Even after Dan made mistake after mistake, they never considered that he was the killer, and that Sam had experienced foul play.  Imagine if Sam had found Julie's body and went on the run - he'd be on death row right now.  Sam's friend Reuben immediately noted that Sam's supposed texts sounded nothing like Sam.  I'm sure Sam's father backed up Reuben.  The police really rushed to judgment and had blinders on for most of this case.  If Dan hadn't made a couple of significant mistakes, they never would have discovered the truth.

 

One thing I'm unsure of is whether Dan is a psychopath.  I'm leaning towards no, but it was an attempt to establish an insanity defense.  When retelling his crimes, he mentioned somewhere about being super nervous, which doesn't fit the profile of a cold and calculated killer.  I also doubt that he was laughing his ass off as he dismembered Sam's body.  If that was true, he would have been able to dismember and dispose of his body in entirety.  He also cackled and put his head down on the table after confessing, and I found that overly orchestrated.

 

Something that really struck me through his first couple of interviews was his reference of Rachel as "wife".  He did that at least twice.  It gave me the overpowering impression that he always knew he would be questioned as a peripheral character, but expected it wouldn't happen until after the wedding.  I feel his first two interviews had been heavily rehearsed, and he had planned to be giving them after his honeymoon.

 

Lastly, it occurs to me (yet again) that women need to listen to our gut.  Julie was obviously rattled by "Sam's" strange texts and the sex references, and it bothered her enough that she mentioned it to her brother.  Yet she let her kindness influence her decision to go to Sam's.

[ari333]

I think the gf was in on it, but yeah... why didn't  the dude throw her under the bus?

I think the gf was in on it, but yeah... why didn't  the dude throw her under the bus?

[mythoughtis]

Sam is a twenty-six year old veteran with $60,000 sitting in his bank account, yet he shares a checking account with his father and attends community college where he requires a tutor.   Julie is five or six years out of high school, is attending community college when most of her classmates have probably graduated university a couple of years ago, aspires to a somewhat unrealistic career of fashion, literally died wearing a tiara, has a mother who still waits up for her at the age of twenty-three, and her mother hopes she'll live at home forever

 

Sam's Dad may have had a similar on-line access that I have to  my sons.  I can get to his account on-line to put money in because he has granted me access.  I don't have my name on his account.  This made it easy to put money in when he needed it, as I could just transfer from mine to his.  He may have attended community college because he is trying to save money, or was just an average high school student when it came to grades.  Tutors are a great way if there are courses you have issues with.  My son used them especially for calculus or writing.

 

I wondered the same thing you did about Julie.  They never addressed why she was still at a community college.  About the living at home and the Mom waiting up thing... that may be part of their culture. 

[biakbiak]

I saw that episode too. Dan definitely had delusions of grandeur. He obviously didn't think about the fact bank ATMs have security cameras and the trail would lead police back to him. And I too think the fiancée knew more than she let on.

I actually do think he realized that is why he got the teenager to do it because he had no connection. They didn't find the kid through the atm video they found him because of the charge at the pizza place and him being a regular there.

[LakeGal]

I believe the gf definitely knew about the murders.  I am not sure how involved she was with it.  She could have found out after the fact.  But she might have been in on the plan from the beginning.  We will probably never know unless Dan talks.  Right now he is probably still in love and protecting her. Playing the role of her hero and protector.  But sitting in jail he might become resentful if she starts dating again.  Then he might talk to get attention back on himself.

[Morbs]

I don't think millennials being in a state of arrested development is really that uncommon. Besides the personal coming of age that can result in delaying graduation, depending on location there still aren't that many jobs out there. My area has had a 0.0% job growth the last year and the average millennial income is $20,000 so parents are playing a much longer role in their children's life.

[Hank3]

I watched this episode the other night.  It's probably one of the better ones this season.  The video of the GF in the confession room with Dan, when did that occur?  Was this before or after the phone call from jail? 

[pigs-in-space]

Good point.   Just discovered this blog, from someone who knew Daniel before the murders who got back in touch with him in jail:  http://danielwozniakismyfriend.com/  

 

The person who writes this blog plans to write "a book or a play or both."  And while she rightfully points out that no one will be forced to read/watch her efforts, I get the impression she likes the attention being a "friend" of a convicted murderer gets her.

 

((ETA: I just read more of the blog, and in the beginning posts the writer keeps talking about how she wanted to find a "cute" picture to send him and be remembered as "hot" which...ick.  Definitely reads like an attempted prison romance.))

 

I also don't really understand how Daniel planned to get the $60k.  The only time that he logically could have gotten it was just after he killed Sam/before Julie's body was discovered.  After that any idiot would know that the police would be monitoring Sam's bank accounts.

 

I felt so bad for Julie's mother, especially when she mentioned that every day on her drive home from work she listens to the last mix CD her daughter made her and cries.  How heartbreaking.

Edited January 19, 2016 by pigs-in-space

[glowlights]

Yes the 911 caller said he shot himself.

 

Thank you! I deleted the ep on my dvr and couldn't go back. This has been driving me crazy. When the 911 call was first played at the beginning of the ep, I turned to my (long-suffering) husband and said, "That's one weird 911 call." It didn't sit right with me before I'd even heard the rest of the case. And then we find out that their suicide tale misdirected the investigation and caused evidence to be destroyed... maybe the landlords were thoroughly investigated, but I felt it behooved Keith to fill us in on why they were so sure he'd shot himself if they didn't see the crime take place, why the wife was talking to 911 like she was reporting a flat tire and not a dead person, why they had allegedly gone to check on him (right?) but didn't take note of the blood and bullet holes on the front stoop, which if you were checking up on someone would be something you'd notice imo.... It's really driving me crazy. I'm not saying the landlords did it, I'm saying that what was reported on Dateline doesn't add for me. Driving. Me. Nuts. Boo, Keith, boo!

 

I was surprised that the ex boyfriend was convicted of killing the veterinarian when it was years later and there was no new evidence. I really wondered if the girlfriend herself was the killer. The veterinarian really didn't seem as enamoured with her as she was with him. He was from what I remember a dozen years older than her and they hardly seemed to have much in common. On top of that he was seeing other women. I found it interesting that they found in his autopsy that he had recently had intercourse, given that he had just returned from a conference. Maybe she found out and flipped out? I thought even years after the murder that the girlfriend was odd.

 

Interesting about the girlfriend. I wonder how specific the autopsy was re: how recent the intercourse had been, given that there is a discrepancy between the original findings re: time of death and the contents of his stomach, plus lack of dog mess in the house. The girlfriend's ex-husband sure was a nasty piece of work but that doesn't make him guilty of this particular crime. Not necessarily.

Edited January 19, 2016 by glowlights

[UsernameFatigue]

I am trying to remember the specifics about the ex boyfriend (I don't think they were married). She was seeing the vet while she was still living with the boyfriend from what I remember. The only thing I remember was that he went to the vet's house in the middle of the night claiming to have car trouble but really to check and see if the ex girlfriend was there? And he went into her home and read her diaries? From what I remember they were high school sweethearts and given that she was only 20 I assume he was the same, so likely first loves? Not that that excuses anything but I did some things when I was losing my first love that I look back and shake my head at. If I recall he went on to have a normal life (wife, kids, stable job) while the ex girlfriend seems to have stayed single and living in the past. Not that that means he didn't do it but I didn't see anything that would make me think he would have killed the vet - I don't know how he got convicted unless there was evidence given at the trial that we don't know about (which certainly happens as Dateline isn't all that good at details).

Edited January 20, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[UsernameFatigue]

Woops, good thing I still had this epi on my PVR as I went back and rewatched it. I remember falling asleep at times during the first time I watched since it dragged on for two hours. So I was very pleasantly reminded that the ex boyfriend wasn't convicted of the murder of the veterinarian. Thank goodness as watching it the second time I am even more convinced that he had nothing to do with it.

 

I also misremembered about the girlfriend - she did go on to get married and have three kids. However I liked her even less the second time around. She said that after the first time her ex was charged and the case was thrown out she went to visit her sister in another state and never returned to her hometown to live. She said the reason was because her ex lived there. But her ex moved out of state about the same time, and being from a small town people would certainly know that he no longer lived there. So she had no reason not to return if she wanted to. Gulit maybe?

 

I also thought it was convenient that she supposedly talked to the vet around 10:15 on Friday night when he suddenly said he had to go, as if he had been interrupted. And of course that would fit it to the prosecution's contention that he was killed then. But the body wasn't found until Sunday. There was no mention that she maybe tried to call him on Saturday, or found it odd that she didn't hear from him. And if she tried to call him one would think he would have an answering machine that would show incoming calls. But no mention of calls from Ann. Hmmmm. Finally I was astounded that she was crying that she wished her ex had been convicted so she would stop feeling guilty. Wouldn't the fact that there was no evidence to convict him make her feel better? Unless of couse she actually was the killer.

 

Larry does seem most likely the murderer though, and Saturday the most likely day the vet was murdered.  Sickening that the police officer got stuck on Tom and wanted him convicted no matter what.

[12catcrazy]

This was one of the better Dateline episodes I've seen recently.  And I guess this is a generational thing (because I'm in my 50s), but if Julie had actually given her friend an ACTUAL PHONE CALL instead of texting and then going over to his apartment, she would probably still be alive today.  

 

I'm still on the fence on whether or not Rachel knew about the murders or had anything to do with them.  During her Dateline interviews her eyes seemed very empty.  Dunno...

[glowlights]

Thanks for watching it again, UsernameFatigue! I love that name, btw. :)

 

I woke up in the middle of the night and couldn't stop thinking about this case, so I decided to stop being lazy and actually looked for some articles online. And now I'm even more disgusted with the whole scenario. This could end up being book length diatribe, but here are a few things that stand out to me:

 

- Ann Wishman (the girlfriend) called Brian on the night of the 12th and says she was surprised he answered because she had been led to believe he would be gone another day; if she didn't expect him to be home, why was she calling?

 

- Ann says Brian hung up abruptly; the autopsy shows he had recently had intercourse; seems not too much of a leap to wonder if he had lied to her about when he was coming home and was having some private time with a lady friend when she called; I also wonder if someone told her they'd seen him at the local restaurant, and she called to check up

 

- the evidence from Calamity Jane (the bloodhound) was ruled inadmissable when charges were brought the first time, causing the case to be dropped; I would really like to know why the first judge ruled against that evidence, especially since the prosecutor's case hinged on it

 

- Brian's shirt was torn, one eye was swollen, and he had two gunshot wounds to one of his arms besides the shot to the chest that killed him; there was a trail of blood from the back door to the kitchen, as well as the blood drops outside on the stoop and the bullet holes going into the house; even if we give a pass to the landlords who called 911, how on earth did police responding to the scene ignore all the evidence of a struggle and immediately go along with the suicide story? I'm calling bullshit on their "aw shucks, we're just country folk ain't used to big city crime" act; from the second Brian's body was "discovered" it seems there was an effort by multiple people to construct a false narrative and literally sweep the case away; WHY?

 

- here's a prime nugget; you can't tell me this was standard police procedure:

When it comes to evidence, public defender Jennifer Streano said the evidence in the Rein case was compromised and destroyed from day one, when Chouteau County sheriff’s deputies and then-undersheriff Mike Paulino cleaned up the pool of blood under the Rein's body and threw away the telephone wedged between his head and the wall at the direction of the coroner. She added that Paulino disposed of that evidence in his trash at home and never retrieved it, though it likely sat there for days until the garbage was collected.

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/crime/2015/09/22/defense-rests-case-jaraczeski-trial/72642484/

 

- sadly, Jaraczeski did not go on to enjoy an exemplary life; his wife filed for divorce and took out an order of protection against him, citing domestic abuse; he's no boy scout and clearly has issues with women... but that doesn't automatically make him Brian's murderer and supposedly at trial the defense showed a number of other suspects were not pursued, not to mention the glaring issues with the timeline and zero physical evidence linking Jaraczeski to the crime scene

 

Maybe he did do it and maybe there are reasonable explanations for everything I'm stuck on. But for me there are just too many questions right now. Thanks for nothing, Dateline. :(

[UsernameFatigue]

Wow, thanks for all the info glowlights! I think I will do the same as you did when I get a chance and do some online research. But you are very correct that the suicide scenario made no sense from the get go as even the show brought up the facts of the blood outside the house. And who kills themself by first shooting themself in the arm - twice!!

 

Very interesting info about Ann and her phone call to Brian on Friday night! Also about Tom's later life. What did stand out to me during the whole two hours is that Ann not once said in the 4 1/2 years that they were together than he was violent. Other than he said years earlier he would kill anyone she might cheat on him with. (And I don't necessarily believe her). Even when he heard the phone message from the vet and knew she had cheated on him he wasn't violent. Not that he should be but if he was never violent in 4 1/2 years with her why would he kill the guy she moved on with? Usually when this happens the guy has been physically violent in the past.

 

The bloodhound evidence was thrown out supposedly because neither the bloodhound or the trainer were certified. Do you think there are other reasons glowlights?To me if someone was going to kill another person why go to the bother (as was said in the show) of stealing that person's gun before hand? Makes no sense. And why would Tom even know the vet had a gun? Ann on the other hand would. Also the gun was cleaned with solvent afterwards. Hmmm, wasn't Ann the person who cleaned Brian's trailor so would know where those things were kept?

Edited January 20, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[glowlights]

Thank you for clarifying why the bloodhound's evidence was thrown out. I recall thinking it was odd during Dateline that they just said "a bloodhound" instead of saying which K9 unit had been called in or which agency had lent a bloodhound. If it was just a guy and his dog then no kidding it should have been tossed! Sheesh.

 

Ann said she did consider taking out a restraining order, but it was for stalking behavior, not violence. She also changed her statement a number of times about whether Tom said anything threatening toward her dating another guy. She also conceded that he stopped contacting her in 1997. Meanwhile, she admits that during the time Bryan was at the conference she went over there without his permission and cut his grass and hung out in his house. Yet sees no parallel between that and Tom entering her house without permission. Then she's calling Bryan's house when she thinks he won't even be home from the conference. Why? Obsessed, much?

 

It wasn't Ann's DNA in Bryan's underwear, but I'd love to know more about that. I mean, was it just trace DNA that could even have come from the factory where the underwear was made or from someone folding his laundry, or was there actual body fluids?

 

The best resource for the trial seems to be the Great Falls Tribune. If you go to www.greatfallstribune.com and type "Bryan Rein" into their search engine, it should come up with all the trial coverage. Lots of great info. I'm still reading. FWIW I think you're right to cast a side eye in Ann's direction... I am also casting a side eye in the direction of the landlord... and the coroner... and everyone else. Hoo boy. Too bad Dateline fumbled this one so badly because there really is a lot to the story.

[UsernameFatigue]

In the articles you read did it say that it wasn't Ann's DNA on his underwear? On the show of course they never said she was tested and I assumed they just took her word for it that it wasn't hers. Could it have been? In the show they just said that unidentified DNA was found inside his underwear which made me think there was some kind of fluid to draw attention to it. Would they have swabbed his underwear just randomly if there was nothing to indicate a reason to? ie. would they even know there were skin cells there to test?

 

Wow to Ann going over to Bryan's place without permission and hanging out at his house. Their whole relationship (such as it was) only lasted a total of two months and that included when she was still llving with Tom. Yep, pretty obsessive in a short period of time. At least with Tom they were together for 4 1/2 years so while some of his behaviour was pathetic it seems if anything Ann was more obsessive over the vet.

 

I really liked Tom's lawyer and think Tom should thank his lucky stars that he had him. With regards to the dog and handler the first time Tom was charged the handler said he had lost the papers certifying himself and the dog at the time he was working on the case. The lawyer brought up that it was now and year and a half later and the handler admitted he still didn't have certification papers. I also like at the end when Keith asked Tom who he thought did it and Tom said he would not point fingers at someone else as he knows what it is like to be wrongly accused. Something an innocent man would say IMO.

[UsernameFatigue]

I think I am getting obsessed about this case but HOLY CRAP- I just read this on the Great Falls Tribune website of the testimony of Ann (whose surname is now Stone):

 

Streano asked Stone when she first learned an 11-inch hair belonging to her was found, with the root attached, in Rein’s palm when he was found dead. Stone said no one told her about it until her interview with defense counsel earlier this year

 

Seriously????????????? An 11 inch hair with root still attached belonging to Ann was found in Rein's palm and she was never considered a suspect?? WTH is wrong with these cops? And why did Dateline leave that rather important piece of evidence out of their story??? Again, WTH?????

Edited January 21, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[glowlights]

Unfortunately I've hit my limit of free views on the news site, but yes one of the articles I read stated that (according to the defense) Ann's DNA was ruled out wrt the underwear. However, I'm still not sure what type of sample was tested (body fluids, or something that could have been made by simple touch contact?) and you raise a good point - what caused them to look in his underwear? Or did they test all of his clothes?

 

I am dumbfounded that Dateline didn't mention the hair. Given the amount of time she had spent at his place it's entirely possible that it was there already and got stuck to his bloody hand, but to not even mention it... I get the feeling Dateline believes Tom did it and chose not to discuss all the other hinky stuff, which is a total disservice imo.

 

In support of the prosection's timeline and theory, Tom called the vet clinic and asked the assistant (who also happened to be Bryan's landlord) when Bryan was coming home from the conference, and wihtout even asking who was calling she gave out the info that Bryan was returning a day early. So Tom knew Bryan would be home, even though Ann supposedly didn't. Bryan's cell phone was not used after Friday night and no one else heard from him after Friday night. After Bryan's death Tom sent flowers and condolence letters to Ann, and not just a few. Whether or not Tom killed Bryan, imo he's bad news and women should avoid him like the plague. Possessive, obsessive, unpredictable, no boundaries, and a total kook.

 

However, if Bryan was enjoying time with a "friend" it is possible that he simply turned off his phone and was, you know, busy. It was also not explained why he decided to return home a day early. Or, maybe he had an intimate encounter when he was at the conference and his underwear was still dirty when he died. Funny that no one has come forward and said they had relations with him and it could be their DNA in the underwear. I still wonder if it was a trace sample that could even have been from the store or from someone doing his laundry.

 

Here's a question: why did the landlord call his wife and have her do the 911 call? Why didn't he call 911 himself, seeing he was there at the scene and would have been MUCH more helpful in relaying details?

 

Dateline did a piss poor job on this one, imo. What did they send Keith out there for, to strike poses on country roads and get a farmer tan?

 

[saber5055]

OK, folks. Was the girlfriend in on it?

 

I think she knew more than she admitted to, and pretty much knew her fiance was a murderer. But I don't think she was involved with any planning. She did know jail calls are recorded so said all the right things while being taped and video'd. But the killer boyfriend didn't say anything back when she told him (on the jail call) that they didn't need money. If she was in on the planning, he would have spilled it then.

 

All I could think of was, the headless, armless, legless torso waiting up there in the loft of that theatre. Just ... no thanks.

I wondered the same thing you did about Julie.  They never addressed why she was still at a community college.  About the living at home and the Mom waiting up thing... that may be part of their culture.

 

I lived at home and worked for six years to save money for college before I moved out-of-state for school. I was a 25-year-old freshman, older than Julie. I moved back after graduation, and it was a year or so before I could get on my feet to move out for good. And yeah, my mom didn't exactly "wait up for me" while living at home, but we each knew where the other was and when we would be coming home. 

 

Everyone lives their lives differently.

[Ohmo]

My take on Julie living at home is that there might have been a cultural element to it.  I'm not Asian, but just from my general awareness of what I learned throughout school, many Asian cultures show great respect toward their parents and education is something that is valued.  Julie's father never spoke on camera, and her mother seemed like she veered toward the traditional side of the spectrum.  Julie seemed non-traditional in the way she dressed, but perhaps she was traditional in her relationship with her parents.  I didn't find it odd that she still lived at home.

 

As to Rachel, I do think she's involved somehow.  I don't think she participated in the actual murders, but I think she could have been party to anything after that.  I think it's more than just knowledge after the fact.  I can't put my finger on it, but something in her demeanor and mannerisms leads me to think she was involved in an action after the fact.