A Horse Farm Lies at the Center of Bob Dorotik’s Murder
(“Marathon Man,” Forensic Files)
The Forensic Files episode about Bob Dorotik’s murder stands out because the case was so easy to solve. Police arrested Jane Dorotik just four days after she reported her husband missing.
The couple were warring over their horse farm, and Jane was so impatient to get Bob out of her way that she rushed into a foolish, poorly executed homicide plan.
Good year for someone. A number of YouTube commentators decried Forensic Files for even taking up its bandwidth with such an obvious whodunit.
But 2020 brought a surprise for true-crime viewers and Jane herself: Innocence advocates managed to get her guilty verdict overturned because of advances in DNA technology.
For this week’s post, I looked into the new evidence and ended up finding other intriguing intel about the Dorotiks that Forensic Files didn’t mention. I also checked on the status of her relationship with her daughter — whom Jane’s defense lawyer tried to blame for Bob’s death.
So let’s get going on the recap of “Marathon Man”:
Bucolic bliss. On February 13, 2000, Jane Dorotik notified the sheriff that her husband never returned home after going for a jog on a rainy afternoon.
Jane and Bob lived on a huge horse farm on Bear Valley Heights Road in Valley Center, a rustic area an hour from San Diego.
The couple, who married in 1970 and briefly separated and reunited circa 1999, had three grown children.
Respected RN. Nick worked in construction and was a semi-professional snowboarder. Alex was attending law school. Middle child Claire, 24, still lived at home on Charisma Farms while she was finishing a graduate degree in psychology at San Diego State University and working as a personal trainer.
Their mother brought home a six-figure salary as an executive of operations for area psychiatric hospitals. Earlier in her career as a registered nurse, she worked at UCLA Hospital and later helped found programs to assist teenagers struggling with mental health and substance problems in Tucson.
Bob worked as an engineer at Lockheed at one point, but his professional trajectory was a little uneven.
Mane conflict. Claire and Jane loved horses and kept more than a dozen on the farm, including an Oldenburg named Nimo who shared a special bond with Claire.
Bob resisted when Claire and Jane wanted to increase the amount of family funds spent on the ranch operation — they bought, trained, and resold horses there — but he liked the equine critters well enough.
Unfortunately, he wouldn’t get any more opportunities to ride one. The day after Jane called 911 to report Bob missing, sheriff’s deputy James Blackmon found him dead on Lake Wohlford Road, near his favorite jogging path, at 4:35 a.m.
Sneaks too spiffy. Bob, who was physically fit and ran marathons, had on a T-shirt and dark-red jogging pants. Someone had wrapped a rope around his neck and beaten him about the head.
As mentioned, law officers had plenty to work with from the get-go. Bob’s sneakers lacked any mud, water, or dirt marks, which conflicted with Jane’s story that he had gone for a run. Someone had tied his shoes awkwardly, with the bows askew.
Next to Bob’s body, they saw tire tracks and drag marks.
Some nosebleed. Jane, who apparently considered herself above suspicion, allowed a search of the house right away.
The police found a damp stain tinged with red, which Jane’s sister-in-law said came from a dog who sustained a cut to its dewclaw.
Investigators also discovered blood splatter on the ceiling and the underside of the mattress, which they suspected someone had recently turned over. There was so much blood in the room that it had dripped to the lower floor. Jane would later explain that Bob got a lot of nosebleeds.
Incriminating mark. Also inside the house was some of the same type of rope found around Bob’s throat.
In the bathroom wastebasket, officers found used syringes, one of them with an animal tranquilizer known as acepromazine.
On the outside of the discarded syringe, a lab would find Jane’s fingerprint in Bob’s blood. And his blood was on the needle, too.
The blood in the bedroom belonged to Bob as well.
Auto problem. An exam revealed Bob had died from bruises, fractures, and lacerations to the skull. The lab found flecks of color in his wounds as though someone had hit Bob with a painted object, possibly a hammer. Strangulation had contributed to his death.
The vehicle tracks at the murder scene matched the tires on a white Ford F250 pickup parked in the Dorotiks’ garage. It belonged to Jane.
Inside the 1996 truck, investigators found evidence of the victim’s blood partially cleaned up, not exactly a hallmark of innocence (Bette Lucas, Michael Peterson).
Daughter off-premises. In addition to the lady of the house, police at first suspected ranch hand Leonel Morales and Claire, who were both on Team Jane as far as sinking more cash into the horse farm.
But Claire was visiting a relative when Bob disappeared, and Leonel had an alibi as well.
Jane, on the other hand, “did everything but sign her name to the crime,” narrator Peter Thomas said in one of the all-time greatest Forensic Files quotes.
‘All my sisters with me.’ Authorities arrested Jane on Feb. 17, charged her with murder, and held her on $2 million bail.
Her sisters Bonnie Long and Marilyn Ryan immediately came to her defense.
Jane had a bad back and was still suffering from a hip injury sustained after a drunk driver hit her in 1987, Bonnie pointed out.
“How could she have overpowered her marathon-running husband?” Bonnie told the North County Times. “And even more, sling him over her shoulder and carry him 50 feet across a deck and down a flight of stairs?”
Bail back-and-forth. Other family members, friends, and Jane’s boss also vouched for her good character, prompting a judge to knock her bail down to $1 million so she could go home. With the help of her sisters, Claire, and Nick, she moved herself and her horses off of the farm.
But Superior Court Judge Marguerite Wagner suddenly upped the bail to $3 million, which sent Jane into tears and back to the county jail.
The trial kicked off in May 2001, just a little more than a year after Bob Dorotik died.
Quite a chunk of cash. The prosecution made a case that Jane had injected Bob with acepromazine in his sleep, hit him on the head repeatedly, inadvertently tied his shoes awkwardly when she was dressing him, dragged or carried the body to her truck, and left it on the side of the road. She threw away her bloody clothes and the murder weapon in the trash at a shopping center where friends had seen her around the time of the homicide, the prosecution alleged.
Investigators found evidence Bob was looking for a new job, perhaps in anticipation of a divorce.
Jane earned more than Bob, so a split would mean paying him 40 percent of her income in alimony — which would have curtailed her budget for hay, horseshoes, pitchforks, and the like.
Not made of china. Bob’s buddy Jim Goudge, who Forensic Files viewers might remember as the interviewee with a ton of magnets on his refrigerator, told 48 Hours Monday Mystery that Bob said if anything happened to him, authorities should look at Jane.
And here’s the really devastating part of the case: Jane’s sons testified for the prosecution. Both said their mother was physically strong — Alex noted she’d helped lift a heavy drainage pipe on the farm. Nick said that when he asked Jane how his dad’s blood got on the syringe, she didn’t answer.
As for the tire marks at the murder scene, the prosecution said Jane’s car made them when she dumped the body. (She told 48 Hours that the tracks got there when she went out looking for Bob before notifying authorities he was missing.)
Disharmony in the family. Jane’s lawyer, Kerry Steigerwalt, hit back hard. He lobbied aggressively to get the evidence collected from the house thrown away because of lack of probable cause for a search. The judge said no.
But Steigerwalt had more ammo in store. He claimed Claire Dorotik and ranch hand Leonel Morales killed Bob.
Although Claire and her father shared a love of running marathons, they didn’t get along well overall. Steigerwalt read aloud from a letter Claire wrote to her father. “I must take all precautions to protect myself from you,” it said, also accusing her dad of being vicious and untrustworthy. It mentioned her father’s threat to sell the horses, to whom Claire was emotionally tied.
Shunning the stand. Steigerwalt contended that evidence pointed to Claire’s having purchased the acepromazine. (None was found in Bob’s blood, but it might have been there in an amount too small to test.) He suggested that Claire or someone else other than Jane “went crazy” and “blew up” in the bedroom.
Claire and Leonel invoked their Fifth Amendment right not to testify.
Steigerwalt also argued that police ignored a witness who could have helped exonerate Jane. A woman claimed she saw Bob slouched between two men on the night of the murder.
Gone into OT. After deliberating for four days, the jury found Jane guilty.
But before the sentencing, the judge allowed the defense to present a new witness, Sheri Newton, who said that not far from the murder scene, she saw two strange, scary men in a black truck driving on the wrong side of the road on the night Bob disappeared. She recognized one of them as Leonel Morales.
Prosecutor Bonnie Howard-Regan pointed out that Sheri Newton also said she saw Bob Dorotik that night and described him as 6-feet-tall and more than 200 pounds — when Bob, in fact, stood at 5-foot-9 and weighed 147 pounds.
Clink time. The guilty conviction remained in place. Judge Joan Weber, who noted the possibility that someone had helped Jane dispose of Bob, handed the fallen horsewoman 25 years to life.
Off Jane went to women’s prison, where she spent her time reading, praying, meditating, and working outdoors on a yard crew, according to a TV interview from 2002. She would later say that going behind razor wire was like visiting a new country where you can’t communicate and everyone hates you.
In the meantime, most of the Dorotiks’ horses were sold. Sources vary as to whether the family owned Charisma Farms or merely rented it. Either way, it changed hands and no one from the family lives there now.
Advocates win. But in April 2020, after 20 years of incarceration, something positive happened for Jane. Prison officials gave her temporary leave from the California Institution for Women in Corona because of Covid risks.
Even better, in July 2020, a judge wearing a newsprint-patterned PPE mask overturned Jane’s conviction after Loyola Law School’s Project for the Innocent made a case for new evidence that might exonerate Jane. Her advocates pointed out that the murder scene lacked any of Jane’s DNA and that test results of fluid found in the bedroom were inadequate and misleading.
“Spending almost two decades in prison falsely convicted of killing the man I loved has been incredibly painful,” Jane said upon her release. “I lost literally everything in my life that Bob and I had built together. Thanks to my great legal team at Loyola Law School, I feel like I can finally breathe and I’m able to start thinking about making plans for the future.”
‘They out here saying.‘ A spokeswoman for the innocence project said its team was ecstatic over the new ruling
San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan’s office said it would use the latest DNA technology to retest blood evidence from the case.
As far as why Jane allowed Steigerwalt to attempt to pin the murder on her own daughter, Jane said that she trusted her lawyer and that the accusation about Claire was “already out there.”
Partners in crime? After the trial, Claire stated that she planned to stand by her mother. Once released from prison, Jane lived with Claire.
For me, those factors put Jane’s innocence in doubt. If Claire had nothing to do with Bob’s murder, why would she forgive her mother for trying to shift the blame to her? It sounds as though they both conspired to the homicide, then took a chance Jane would be acquitted based on the Claire-did-it defense — but there wouldn’t be enough evidence to convict Claire in the aftermath.
Whatever the truth about Claire, she managed to make a lot of her life after seeing her family torn apart.
Horse sense. She became a marriage and family counselor and is now known as Claire Dorotik-Nana. “As a practicing therapist, I not only found myself facilitating growth through adversity, but became curious about it myself,” she said in an Oxygen interview.
She’s also a published author who’s written about the healing power of her horses. Nimo, the stallion she bonded with when he was just a few hours old, was able to sense Claire’s pain three years later when the murder happened, she wrote.
Claire’s Amazon bio notes that she “has run 39 marathons, three 50-mile races, and nine 100-mile races to honor her father.”
Flanking falsehoods. Her mother, who’s past 70 and appeared meek in an on-camera interview with a regional CBS affiliate, said her experience as a convict has inspired her to work for prison reform.
Jane also told the media outlet that it should be illegal for police to lie while questioning suspects.
She has a point — Forensic Files has covered cases in which police coercion resulted in false confessions — but something tells me Jane was the one doing most of the lying during her interrogation.
You can view the 48 Hours about the case online.
That’s all for this post. Until next time, cheers. — RR
Watch the Forensic Files episode on YouTube
Thanks, Rebecca. As ever, before looking at outlaws look at in-laws…
Yes, the case stinks. Re the farm workers, what would be their motive to murder? Unless they were in his will (unlikely), how would they benefit? Was there evidence of anger with him on their part? Assuming the answers are in the negative I’d dismiss them (with the caveat that they could’ve been paid to do it by either or both of the two Dorotiks in question).
The evidence suggests it’s highly likely, as you suggest, to be either or both said Dorotiks. There’s a raft of evidence pointing to one or both. Like you I don’t buy that a mother’s trying to throw her daughter under the bus would end in this way. Forgiveness might be offered – but living together? I’m reminded of the judge in the Stacey Castor case, commenting on Castor’s trying to implicate her daughter as her father’s killer (when it was patently Castor) that such a move was unique in his long experience and he’d only ever seen the reverse (parents seeking to attract blame for their child’s guilt). So we should be sure that Dorotik senior’s claim his was really quite something…
Bemusing that both blather about healing, reform, etc when at least one is almost certainly guilty of appalling crime… They are likely both deeply wicked.
“It [letter] mentioned her father’s threat to sell the horses, to whom Claire was emotionally tied.” That, of course, applied to her mother too – a potential motive for either or both
As to police using ‘indirections to find directions out’ (Hamlet) – police lies – I disagree with her. Such tactic may well have caused false confession – but it’s likely to have caused far more good in revealing truth and lies. If Dorotik senior was wrongly convicted as the actual murderer (though she may have conspired), her daughter should almost certainly be in her place…
This case made me think of Stacy Castor, too. She really set the low bar for evil.
As far as Leonel Morales, I get the feeling he was more than just a ranch hand. He probably was attached to the horses and Jane and Claire and vice versa.
… So he could’ve been appropriated to commit the actual murder or move the body, but if that were so he was almost certainly ‘hired’ by one of the two Dorotik women (or both) per being apparently motiveless otherwise. I presume police checked the women’s finances for suspicious payment made around the time of the murder (though it would be very foolish of them to have done that)…
Rather distressing for Robert’s remaining loved ones that, technically, a murderer is unidentified (though I suspect they share our view).
Funny we both thought of Castor! I was re-reading about that case yesterday to see if daughter Ashley, like Cynthia McDonnell’s daughter Erin, had expressed the same wish at sentencing of her mother (‘I ask that you give her the maximum…’) It doesn’t seem as if she did in those words, but something similar (as did the prosecutor). As we know, the judge obliged…
I continue to find it unimaginable that a (guilty) parent would do this to their innocent child… I think I read that the deeply evil Fred Grabbe (forensicfilesnow.com/index.php/2020/01/31/fred-grabbe-update-on-an-ogre/)
tried this on his son, but nothing would surprise you of him… Thankfully it seems very rare. (Grabbe’s due parole in 2022.)
Except there’s another possibility….Jon Peart, a thug who randomly attacked people in the weeks before and after the murder.
Moreover, there’s a lot of other stuff that the police and prosecution buried. Jane wasn’t involved PERIOD. Not in any way shape or form.
Fred Grabbe — talk about another killer who set the bar low. Let’s hope he’s too elderly to terrorize anyone if he gets out.
With the ranch hand, my guess would be he was promised a raise or maybe a cut of the profits over time.
The opulence of a horse farm makes me wonder who is more homicidal, the rich, middle class or poor. Sometimes it seems the determination to acquire goes with the will to kill. Any statistics on which social class kills its own the most?
No stats on that, but the episodes about rich people committing felonies are way more schadenfreude-a-riffic.
RR-Thank for a nicely written article. Sorry I can’t say the same for Claire’s publications. I know Claire personally and have followed this case from the beginning. In my opinion, Claire murdered Bob and Jane helped her dump his body. If you met Claire, you would understand why I feel this way. She is the biggest manipulating narcissistic psychopath I have ever come across.
Glad you enjoyed the post! Good to hear from someone closer to the situation — I’m highly suspicious of the daughter’s role as well.
i could see a mother taking the rap for her child, helping to dispose of the body, etc.
White woman privilege in our legal system is undeniable. She should never get out.
I agree– she’s 100% guilty.
So what’s everybody’s take now that she has been excluded as the DNA found on his clothing, under his fingernails and on the rope around his neck? And that the credibility and work record of three criminalists who were part of the original investigation is now in question?
They need to look at the daughter.
What?? You do know that NEW DNA evidence has been entered and NONE of Jane’s was found right? Did you even pay attention? I think the reign of narcissistic males such as yourself is over and that terrifies you all. This new DNA evidence will set her free and you’ll have to eat such a horrible ridiculous accusation regarding “white woman privilege.” Laughable ♀️
But why does the lack of her DNA at the crime scene mean she’s innocent? She left plenty of other evidence in the house and her tire marks were found near his body outside.
Posted at 7:06 PM, May 17, 2022
SAN DIEGO (KGTV) – A murder charge against 75-year-old Jane Dorotik was dismissed this week as she was getting ready for a second trial.
“There was an individual who attacked a couple violently, unprovoked, on January 15, almost exactly a month before Robert Dorotik was killed, very, very nearby along the same stretch of road. They never interviewed that person — he went on to attack two more people, again somebody in March, somebody in April.
Because she’d have left DNA while killing. The criminalists were laughably incompetent and dishonest, lying about doing certain tests.
Alan Keel lied about the DNA in the car being blood, and Ed Blake signed off on it.
ok CLAIRE
Martha: As prospective jurors waited for the retrial to begin, Asst Dist Att Mechals, who had tried the case in 2001 with Howard-Regan, dismissed the case because “the evidence is now insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
As it says on the tin, evidence of guilt *at the criminal standard* was deemed lacking – and while that’s all that matters legally, it’s not all that matters morally when likelihood of guilt remains (as I think it does). There is no suggestion of positive *innocence*; nothing was found that precluded Jane as perp; there is no viable alternative perp (bar Claire – a distinct possibility – or someone they hired); lack of Jane’s (not Claire’s!) DNA on the body doesn’t refute that she was either the perp or otherwise directly or indirectly involved; and there was other evidence that remains probative following the weakening of her case. This is why there was a retrial, not dismissal, of her conviction (which prosecution eventually considered was unwise because of compromised DNA evidence). Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence: lack of DNA is only significant if it was falsely claimed to have existed in order to convict and that is then found wrong or questionable, thus undermining the case – but not undermining *guilt*.
In my view it was poor police /prosecutor activity and not innocence that averted conviction, as implied by this:
‘Dr. Anita Zannin, a bloodstain pattern analysis expert, told the defense [per re-hearing]: “[I]t is my opinion that the bloodstain pattern analysis prepared by Charles Merritt in this case and the conclusions therein, cannot be relied upon, given the many breaches in protocol, discrepancies and lack of basic bloodstain knowledge that are apparent from his report and testimony.”
No there absolutely was. A man who attacked people was a suspect.
Did they ever test Claire or Leonels DNA??
Her bloody fingerprint was on the syringe, case closed.
Yes!
Considering how many of the people involved were corrupt no it doesn’t.
There were a LOT of problems with the case
–A defense expert said that the black paint found on Robert’s skull likely came from a tire iron or pry bar. Months later, in 2020, the prosecution disclosed for the first time that prior to Jane’s trial, a crime lab analyst had concluded the paint came from a crowbar or similar implement. That report had been concealed from Jane’s defense.
–Although Merritt testified and Howard-Regan told the jury that all of the blood stains were DNA tested and all were shown to be Robert’s blood, in fact, only a small fraction had been tested and many of the stains were not blood at all. That evidence showed that Merritt’s testimony and Howard-Regan’s arguments were false, the defense said.
–Evidence showed that there were serious breaches of the chain of custody of Robert’s blood that was preserved during the autopsy. The vial of his blood, which was not sealed, was unaccounted for during the time the Dorotik home was being searched. In October 2020, a District Attorney investigator said he examined the blood vial and asserted that the vial was “full, from the bottom to the top lid.” In March 2021, a defense expert examined the vial and discovered it was less than half full. A nick in the center of the top of the vial appeared to be the mark left by someone inserting a syringe into the vial.
–The prosecution disclosed that in 2009, a lab analyst questioned Merritt’s ability to conduct blood stain pattern analysis. The analyst said Merritt lacked the technical skills to conduct such analysis. In 2021, the prosecution sought out another expert who reviewed Merritt’s reports and trial testimony and concluded his work was based on improper methods and was unreliable. Dr. Anita Zannin, a bloodstain pattern analysis expert, told the defense: “[I]t is my opinion that the bloodstain pattern analysis prepared by Charles Merritt in this case and the conclusions therein, cannot be relied upon, given the many breaches in protocol, discrepancies and lack of basic bloodstain knowledge that are apparent from his report and testimony.”
–Dr. Frank Sheridan, the chief medical examiner of San Bernardino County, California, provided an affidavit for the defense saying that while he could not rule out February 12, 2000 as the time of death, “the time of death was…probably on Sunday, February 13, 2000.” Dr. Sheridan also said the disrobing of the body at the scene ‘likely—if not almost certainly—caused the portion of his scalp seen on his upper chest area to become dislodged and relocated.” Dr. Sheridan also reviewed the photos of the master bedroom and said the staining was insignificant. The wounds were such that if inflicted in the bedroom the blood loss “would have been all but impossible to clean up,” he said.
–DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood.
–Dr. Alicia Villalobos, a veterinarian, provided an affidavit saying that she examined photographs of the Dorotik dogs. One, a Shih Tzu, had an abscess on its snout. The other, an Irish Wolfhound, had a torn dew claw. Both were bleeding injuries and both could have the source of bloodstains on furniture and bedding.
–Matthew Marvin, a latent print and impression analyst, gave an affidavit saying that DeMaria was wrong to exclude the S-10 because the assumption of simultaneity was not justified. He wrote, “There is no scientific basis to eliminate a vehicle based on the exclusion of one impression when it is reasonable that another vehicle could have left that impression.”
–Crime lab bench notes showing that analyst Connie Milton failed to report numerous test results showing that suspected blood was not blood. In addition, documents were disclosed showing that her competence and performance had been called into question as far back as the late 1990’s.
–A lab report of DNA testing on sample stains from the mattress cover in Claire’s bedroom which showed the stains were animal blood, as well as a lab report of DNA tests on a raincoat showing animal, not human, blood. Evidence that after getting that result, the prosecution had told the lab not to test a footstool in the living room.
–A statement from the owners of the horse farm that the carpet in the master bedroom was wet because the bedroom windows leaked when it rained.
–A statement from a family friend to police that she saw one of the family dogs bleeding heavily on the furniture.
–A report of a violent roadside assault on two people that occurred in January 2000, a month before Robert was killed, near the same location where Robert’s body was found. When the defense team investigated that assault, they discovered that the perpetrator, Jon Peart, had been arrested in April—after Robert was killed–and subsequently had been convicted. Interviews revealed that Peart, a user of methamphetamine, was known to suddenly and violently attack people.
The DNA under the victim’s nails was proven to not be Jane as well.
Jon Peart was probably the killer rather then Jane.
Wrong. –DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood.
Moreover there was no injection mark or tranqs in his system. Forensic Files got it wrong.
Viewing this again today I remain of the view that one or other Dorotik is guilty and the fact that one of two of them (if not both) was the likely perp played in their favour (as Rebecca implies): one was charged but it was very possibly the other. Both had a potential motive – at least financial – and Claire evidenced in writing serious antipathy to the victim (‘you are dangerous’). Even at least one brother seems to’ve thought Jane guilty (does he still think so?) If even some of one’s children think one’s capable of murder that could be telling of what that child knew of the poor relationship between potential perps and victim.
There was considerable circumstantial evidence and as Rebecca states, what does lack of their Jane’s DNA on the body prove (did they test for Claire’s)? Why was Jane’s fingerprint *possibly* (this was questioned per her release evidence) in his blood on a syringe in the house (she offered no explanation for that acc’g to FF and I’d want to know why)? I fail to see how her conviction was rescinded just because some of the forensic evidence was later questionable when there was so much indicative evidence… unless it was Claire and not Jane (as she so suggested), suggesting poor work by police/prosecutor. Was her conviction unsafe? Only of Claire or someone they hired did it instead.
If we didn’t need stronger indication, that Bob was an engineer, whose work is hardly likely to attract ‘professional’ anger, and there’s no evidence of hostile relationships *beyond* wife/daughter, who else but the random madman who kills for fun (there was a meth user convicted of violently attacking a couple around the time but Bob was a physically fit man out jogging who was bludgeoned and asphyxiated with a rope, with evidence of body transport – so I don’t buy that possibility)? This isn’t proof… but neither is the circumstantial evidence that convicts most defendants beyond reasonable doubt.
Either one or both did it directly or arranged it.
Who, knowing the case, would want counselling from Claire, given the significant possibility that she was part of such dysfunction and murder. She’s in far more need of therapy than they…
Jane’s innocent, and Rebecca is shitting on Bob’s grave by saying she’s guilty.
What about her blaming her own daughter — doesn’t that seem suspicious?
Not really. The physical evidence against her was bad, and now they can reasonably argue that Jon Peart did it