The Troubled Case Against Jane Dorotik | Full Episode
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 апр 2024
- A woman convicted of murdering her husband discovers serious problems with some key evidence used against her at trial. "48 Hours" correspondent Erin Moriarty reports.
#48hours #crime #mystery
True crime. Real justice. "48 Hours" investigates the most intriguing crime and justice cases that touch on all areas of the human experience including greed and passion. "48 Hours," which premiered in 1988, has developed a rich history of original reporting and impact journalism that has helped exonerate wrongly convicted people, caused cold cases to be reopened and solved, and along the way changed lives.
Subscribe to the "48 Hours" RUclips channel: / 48hours
Watch full episodes of "48 Hours": cbsnews.com/48-hours/full-epi...
Listen to the "48 Hours" podcast: link.chtbl.com/48-Hours
Listen to the "My Life of Crime with Erin Moriarty" podcast: link.chtbl.com/CBSNewsMLOC
Follow "48 Hours" on Instagram: / 48hourscbs
Like "48 Hours" on Facebook: / 48hours
Follow "48 Hours" on Twitter: / 48hours
Subscribe to our newsletter: cbsnews.com/newsletter/
Download the CBS News app: cbsnews.com/mobile/
Try Paramount+ free: paramountplus.com/?ftag=PPM-0...
For video licensing inquiries, contact: licensing@veritone.com
Click here to watch more “48 Hours” full episodes: ruclips.net/p/PLcFHkKbd_jTJiRmfUfLX2Ay_hnf5j3cxH
Qfhi
😮Couldn't they test the
" blood ..that the detectives found on on the wall.?!?😮
PS came back later found out they did test the blood..
and it was his the husband's..
So pathetically sad
😮 anyways I believe because of money the daughter took her mother's side
+Allegedly ..helped her too..
Instructions and family already are happening through all kinds of other unstoppable things that happened to families illnesses etc
but this is sad when you put it on your own family 😞
People keep your family together if you want money and everything to yourself then just be by yourself don't bring other into it your psychotic life.."
Ok
Peace 🕊️😊
4.6.2024
😮😮😮😮
😊
4 th of June 2024 - oh yeah Americans are the only place to mix it the other way round and remove letters from ENGLISH words like colour and neighbour- from a woman in England lol
The photographs of the detective handling evidence without gloves on tells you everything you need to know about that investigative team
EXACTLY THAT ALONE IS A CRIME THAT WAS THIS LADY'S LIFE DOWN THE DRAIN.
@ms.chrisie8040 yes, but will these folks who lied, assumed blood no testing ever be tried..&.punished...
This has happened in other cases. But cops just want fast closure... .cuz maybe political election coming...
Whose DNA was it??? Male but not her husband's...she deserves money for time lost making money and over zealous PROSECUTION, who mislead jury....
And those who bent the truth, not totally true, need time in prison, just a couple of cases of misleading Prosecution, spend 6mo or year, will be more accurate and honest...many others will learn...
Misleading jury...curiously we get to watch court cases on internet or TV...may force more honesty
I had a cattle ranch for many years. Never had blood splatter in my bedroom.
Do you have pets? Not all the DNA was tested so it could’ve been from a pet. And that picture of handling evidence without gloves?! Tainted crime scene!
48 Hours is still the gold standard of true crime reporting. Excellent writing and editing
It's validating.
It's still one sided. Whichever side the funding is on. The media has been used to control and influence people for 200 years. Especially since JP Morgan bought the top 25 newspapers in 1922. For the sole purpose of controlling the narrative. Now they own all media.
She doesn't seem very concerned about what "really" happened to her husband and it's pretty telling that two of her kids believe she did it.
Three sides to every story Jessica; Yours , His, and God Almighty's.
SONS do take sides in families-it's not for US to ascertain. They didn't say she was a "bad" mother, they said
they thought she did it? Why were they not questioned on WHY they came to that opinion? Not very complete.
1: Have to ask after having watched several episodes of Forensic Files... WHAT ANGLE does a perpetrator have to stand it, in order to produce blood spatter on three surrounding walls, simultaneously ?
2, What weapon throws blood spatter at three walls, from the exact same distance from the floor?
3. Where were the samples of hair, fingernail content, or transferred evidences from a potential perpetrator stored from 20 years ago ? DNA on other crime stories is "stored " for decades and bought out to be used OFTEN; Why not in THIS CASE ?
Blind Eye is Correct:
Look at what was NOT considered ?
1. hit and run on a curvy road? (How did he get to that area-if he wasn't biking?)
2. No follow-up on the car the witness saw at the crime scene? Why not? Had Bob been a female, MANY DNA
samples would have been taken.
3. Love the normal accurateness of "Forty Eight Hours", however, it seems they skipped over Jane's answer to
the question about "when last seen?" Did he go out riding his bike for sure? Did he go walking?
Was he "offended" by that person he met with...as he said, and Jane said , that he said..
HE WENT OUT FOR A JOB!
4. No mention of lie detector test results ANYWHERE ?
5. Whether one witness speaks up or not. A statement by a son who was raised with his own views of his own
homelife or parents' ability to communicate, IT'S STILL A PERSONAL OPINION.
This does resemble the road to Valley Center...DANGEROUS to ride bikes OR drive btw!
I hope Jane gets reciprocated for her pain and suffering, and soon!
"Man on the Run" and "I Ain't no Middleman,"
VideosToEncourageHumanity
LyndaFayeSmusic@Yahoo
My biggest question was, "How did Jane manage to get her husband's body through the house and into the truck by herself?" I wouldn't be able to do it. Didn't anyone question that? Wouldn't you see a trail of blood if she dragged him through the house? Even if she cleaned it up, they'd still be able to see it under the carpet like the other blood spots?
He didn't look like he weighed that much tbh. The man was a racing snake!!! A lean-mean-jogging-machine...a man so lean his eyeballs were in single file. I put his weight at 40lbs max. "Dragged him?" She could have thrown him in the truck over-arm!
Maybe, but I first thought there was no way I could move my very heady bed Frame and mattress to shampoo the carpets underneath and I'd have to wait for my husband, until one day my dog had an accident under there and I was determined to clean it. Needless to say I somehow managed to move the entire thing (with health problems) and then place it back. It wasn't easy and took a long time but it was done. She didn't report him missing until well into the evening and he left in the morning. Plenty of time to take breaks and try different tactics. Sorry for my rant hahaha
@@sammyb1651 40lbs? That falls right in the middle of an avg 5 year old. Do you even process what you're writing? You'd be surprised how heavy a person weighs. if u meant 140, then we're starting to go somewhere.
@@jyc313 Sorry. Not 40lbs.
Anywhere between about 39 and 41 lbs.
Watch the forensic files episode. It explains that there was a male ranch hand that sided with Jane and the daughter in wanting to expand the ranch. Bob was against it. They thought it could mean tons of money. They were all in on it together. Hence why the daughter refuses to testify and was the only one proclaiming her mother's innocence. That's how you easily move things: more people 😂
“what do you believe happened?” Jane: “I believe Bob fell into some kind of situation” bruh
Indeed. Other highlights included her response to the massive pool of blood on the mattress ("He told me he'd had a nose bleed once")
Said no woman EVER in the history of human cohabitation! Women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
There was another DNA profile that was not hers. Only not enough to form a full profile!
😂😂bruh! You nailed it!@@sammyb1651
@@sammyb1651 - what a weird generalisation of women.
@@Elena-tq9vs Thanks Elena! How dishonest of you to pretend you don't recognise it! :)
Nobody ever said "oh poor Bob, his last moments must have been horrible. Let's find the real killer" Even at the end, Jane is worried about woman in prison. She never says I need to dedicate time to find the real killer. This whole show was about poor Jane. Yes, her freedom was taken, but my god people, Bob was bludgeoned and strangled. I saw no tears or sympathy for Bob from Jane or the kids.
Yo...he's gone. There is nothing she can do for him. What she can do is get herself out of prison to make sure she stays with here family because at that moment. A horrible crime happened to Bob, but that's done, and now a horrible crime is being committed against her and it's ongoing.There are times when you are COMPLETELY 100% allowed to be selfish. This is one of those times. She has been fighting the system for 20+years. Now that she's out, now she can finally grieve for Bob. Don't pretend to be some holier than though, virtue signaling martyr, no one fought for this woman, she has every right to fight for herself and move on.
@@jennymaria86I agree. Also, we don’t know if, how or how long she mourned for “poor Bob” of camera. This show is about her. Obviously she is going to tell her story.
Frankley, rewind. In the beginning before her arrest JANE was the one saying all of that. She lost her husband, her home, her children, her horses, her freedom and her dignity, and got 20 years in a cement jail cell for a crime she didn't do. Um, yes, let's all say it together....poor Bob.
Can't explain the bloody fingerprints says a lot
@@peggypasson8794 Rewind. That was explained.
How can a parent, especially a mother, be okay with an attorney implicating their child. I caught what she said about how she'd admit to the killing if it'd take the blame from her daughter. That statement tells me enough
The evidence speaks for itself. This lady seems guilty as charged. She's a good actor and cold and heartless in implicating her own daughter. Enough said.
these vil witches dont care, look at casey Antony
@@rachelmurray1228 agreed
That‘s when I said: Guilty!
I would never point the finger at my daughter.
I quit at 24:00, when she blamed her defense attorney, and said she would have stood up and declared herself guilty. Well, it happened, and you didn't do it, did you?!!! This woman is disgusting.
Sometimes there's a case where I do feel that perhaps the wrong person was charged and convicted. This is definitely not one of them. Sorry, Jane. I don't believe you.
Interesting take 🤔
@@yolandashaw2940that’s one word for it.
People like OP are the reason why I’d never agree to a jury trial.
You have to be crazy or just stupid to ignore all those holes in the prosecution’s case and still come to the conclusion “she did it.”
Well it's a good thing you're not a cop or a prosecutor with your complete lack of logic skills
@@EchoJNot believing her in the “real world”(outside of court) & finding doubt on a jury are two different things. That’s is what I think people fail to understand when on a jury.
dna already prooved she is innocent.. geez.. common sense left the chat i guess
In the beginning I started to believe she might have not committed this crime, but by the time she was laying guilt on her daughter and showed no real interest in finding the “presumed” killer, I then began changing my mind. And the fact that her two own sons were testifying against her, spoke volumes to me. Everyone should be held innocent until proven guilty, but the facts clearly pointed towards her- more than on anyone else. She served 20 years for a reason. I don’t believe she was 100% speaking the truth about what happened. Nose bleeding? Who nose-bleeds that much at once? Staining the bed, the floor and so much of the carpet? I’m doubtful
The State are clearly satisfied she's guilty. They just know they can't prove it to a criminal standard any longer due to the loss of evidence. I think they just abandoned it in the end because she'd already served 20 years. That's something at least!
The fact her "innocence" team wouldn't make themselves available for comment tells a story of its own. As does the fact two of her children testified against her and her defence was based on the other child being responsible. A truly ruthless manipulator!
Incidentally, re: her response to the massive pool of blood on the mattress ("He told me he'd had a nose bleed once") Ahem Said no woman EVER before or since! Women will have a full on melt down if you so much as set your beer down wrong on the coffee table. They do NOT casually ignore it when you (supposedly) turn the bed they share with you into something resembling an abattoir floor.
@@sammyb1651 Only going to argue with the last point to please don't generalize; you're just going to get it wrong half the time.
@@BlueCyann Is incorrect. Generalizations are perfectly valid. It's a RUclips comments section, not a court of law. We're not dealing with rules of evidence or concerned with proving anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Her liberty isn't at stake. We're just talking conversationally based on what we saw on a TV program.
Additionally exceptions that disprove generalisations are just that. Exceptions. Ergo they wouldn't result in error "half of the time", merely occasionally.
Your analysis is flawed both qualitatively and quantitatively. 👍
You obviously never had nose bleeds!
dearmakeupdiary... I don't disagree with you but how do you explain her dragging his dead body from the bedroom, out of the house, to the truck, then lifting him up and over the tailgate. That to me seems impossible.
Guilty as charged. This woman isn't sincere and was even willing to put the blame on her own daughter. Now she blames her defense attorney for it but if she had really been against that tactical move she would have stood up there and then and screamed her daughters innocence at the top of her lungs. Anybody willing and capable of such a thing against their own child is capable of other sinister stuff. Disgusting creature who needs to be behind bars!!!
Wat if she took the bullied for the daughter ??? Have u thought about it? There was some truth ..why didn't she put the blame on the sons ? It was the daughter
Bullet*
@@Kevindesiren if she had taken the bullet for her daughter, why would she agree with her lawyer to point the finger to the daughter eventually? 😅
@@smurfiennesShe only agreed up to a point. I also think the daughter did it.
@@dkaob8351 The daughter had an alibi. The wife did not.
At least she served 20 years, she's definitely guilty
You're guilty...of having zero logic skills 🤣
I agree! She's guilty
Agreed
@@frogbluesoh yeah you're so 100% she's guilty that DNA male DNA doesn't matter at all so glad public opinion has zero bearings in life
Oh yeah she's her 20 years was found innocent through DNA testing now she gets to sue the state sue the city sue the police department and the taxpayers get to pay for it so glad your public opinion doesn't matter so glad the taxpayers now get to pay her bill as if they get to pay her a bunch of money
This episode demonstrates the importance of good housekeeping!
Doesn't matter how much you clean, forensics can still tell if there's been blood there or not.
@@hbrock32 yeah, if they want to actually find blood. But in this case some random stains that look like blood get someone convicted!
Good catch haha.
Haha my house everyday : there appears to have been a struggle ...
@@hbrock32no I think they meant as in having a clean house so you can know exactly is something not in place. Like not cleaning up the dogs blood. They actually had a case where a woman and child were raped and murdered. The lady vacuumed her house the night before and they were able to get so much pubic hair out the carpet since it was freshly done.
This has to be the most puzzling 48-hours episode I've ever watched.
Not being able to prove that she did it doesn't mean she didn't do it.
What? Are you ok with convicting someone when you are not 100% sure they committed the crime?
@@MadBroStudioI think they are saying it's puzzling because we still don't know who did it....not saying she should be convicted without enough evidence. It's true though there is still no closure for this case. It's PUZZLING, lol.
@@MadBroStudioThe standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," not "100% certainty." Otherwise, the US would have a prison pop. of about 500. 😂
So she should be in prison? Beyond reasonable doubt doesn't apply here?
Guilty people do get away with it sometimes. Beyond a reasonable doubt does mean virtual certainty according to what I have read. Juries terrify me because none of us agree on anything.
Jane Dorotik is 100% INNOCENT! This is clearly the case of a serial killer dubbed "The Random Killer". He randomly selects middle-aged men jogging along the road and kills them. Then, he sneaks into their house to spread blood evidence. Then, when no one is looking, he takes their car out of the driveway to leave tire impressions at the crime scene. Then, he sneaks the car back into their driveway without anyone in the residence hearing the car come or go. It's almost unbelievable! ☮️✌️☮️
What a terrible mother to use her daughter as a scapegoat!!!
A bedroom with so many blood stains and spatter.... Blood under the mattress, under the carpet.
What kind of housekeeping went on there?
Yuck!
It was proved it wasn't all blood,
Killer housekeeping
If it wasn’t all Blood it still wasn’t thoroughly cleaned @shivanipaiverma2230 I’m w/you what kind of housekeeping went on in there? 🤢 Seems Like Not much 😬🤮
and what kind of "nosebleedong"! I ve had nosebleeding, the blood pattern how it was spread is totally NOT from a mere nosebleeding...
@@margochanning6868 😂😂😂
Mother and daughter were least interested to know who bludgeoned and strangled Bob Dorotik. Strange.
Very strange. I think the daughter was involved but the mother did it for sure.
@@chandracox6814 yeah... I mean they suggest that the mother put the body herself in the trunk. Women can be strong , sure, but a grown man is very heavy. She might have had somebody's help
The fact that she didn't get a fair trial doesn't mean she didn't commit the crime.
In all fairness, they didn't have a chance! They immediately had to go into defense mode!
@@angelalalley7593 I agree, but I've seen murderers walk away with more circumstantial evidence...they should have investigating far more than they did though, quick and dirty this case was, and this mess could have been avoided altogether
Anybody notice that after blaming the daughter back in the day, she's now shifted to blaming the husband? By saying vaguely that he must have gotten into some kind of trouble. Suggesting he must have brought his death on himself.
Yeah he did. Marrying her. Those things, neither of them, are just not what a normal person does who's seeking answers. It is what somebody does who's trying to deflect responsibility.
haha
The idiocy of the comments. Did you understand ANYTHING they said. She didn’t blame the daughter the attorney did. Further the sloppy investigation and gathering of DNA is poor. None of her DNA was on him, the rope, or under his fingerprints.
pretty sure it was mom and the daughter...just a gut feeling
The extra dna isn’t hers or her daughter’s. Her DNA wasn’t on him at all. The blood in the house wasn’t even blood!
Often the most simplest explanation is correct. The guilty convolute the truth so at least they can create doubt. It’s how they live with themselves.
Occam's Razor
Yes, I agree. Occam's razor seems to apply here.
She wasn’t guilty.
@@suenevin57There was zero evidence of her innocence. There simply wasn't enough evidence to convict her beyond a reasonable doubt.
How did she get him out of the house into the car
It was shocking to see that expert witness handling evidence bare handed. To me, that is a symbol of the whole shoddy case against this woman. Unbelievable!
Yes. There were definitely mistakes made that were inexcusable, but the evidence still overwhelmingly points to her.
The person handling the evidence bare handed was not a witness. What are you talking about?
oh please, she was the bread winner, we all know how women treat men when that happens, blood spray on the ceiling and all arounf the place.
Same to me! It actually had me thinking about Bryan Kohberger me the Moscow Idaho student murders. I'm so glad this life woman was finally set free disappointed at her sons though.
Nope. I guess you didn't really watch the show. The prosecutors and "detectives" and evidence were seriously flawed.
Sons testifying against their own mother, that broke my heart but then the mother blamed her own daughter....???!!!F*** she did it, put her a** back in prison.
Right! I’m so in confusion
There's not enough evidence.
@@alex-qd6of lmao , plenty of blood all over and even his blood on the tranqulizers , dont be naive.
I missed where she blamed her daughter.
@@JSmith-oc5jhher defense team did
His shoes were spotless…
That much blood spatter in the bedroom and she’s trying to explain around it? I’m glad she was found guilty. Poor man
of course many women think thats normal, lol
She said the dog had an open sore that was bleeding. Maybe the dog shook itself, and in the same way that water goes everywhere when a dog is wet, maybe that's how a little blood splatter got on the walls and ceiling.
They didn't test most of those stains to even confirm it was blood!
She is evil
I can't believe she did it, i have watched many many true crime shows and cannot remember a single one where a woman strangled her husband, it's just not in a woman's nature.
Am I the only one who finds Jane completely unsympathetic??
Yes🎉🎉
You are not the only one. I think she was guilty.
Yeah I find it hard to like anything about her. I also don't believe the case against her was pristine nor beyond reasonable doubt.
Thank God the court of public opinion has no bearing on legal standings it doesn't matter if she's unsympathetic or not it only matters if she committed the crime and there is no actual proof she committed the crime the syringe that has her bloody fingerprint on it and his blood is irrelevant because there was no tranquilizer in his system so that that they keep spreading around is irrelevant whether she was very emotional and court or showed no emotional at all is irrelevant whether she was a good housekeeper or a shity housekeeper was irrelevant that are son said that she argued with her husband and threatened divorce was irrelevant there was never any signs of domestic violence that was relevant public opinion has no basis in a courtroom
She is a Murderer!
While I'm not sure if she was physically capable of killing her husband in the manner he was killed, two things were left unanswered for her to be believed: the rope around his neck just happened to be the same rope found in the house and blood splatter on the ceiling in the bedroom?! How the hell does blood get on an 8-10 foot high ceiling with no explanation?
It's possible. You know how dogs shake themselves off after bath? If there was an abscess present, especially on its head, and he shook it could explain the cast-off on the walls and ceiling. Not necessarily saying I believe it one way or another. Just that it is possible.
@@justme6773 With DNA testing, it'd be very easy to rule out dogs from human. Also, abscesses are usually composed of infection/pus, not pure blood.
But what about the male DNA found on the rope?
There is more evidence to her guilt than many cases that put people in prison.
That’s wild
Truth
From the beginning all I waited on was to hear what the children thought. After hearing the son's testified against her you already know
Children can be frustrated or angry with parents for one reason or another. Their testimony didn't unequivocally prove anything though.
Frustrated enough to send their mama to prison? And what abt her? Wanting to send her daughter instead!
@nikos9257 She didn't want to send her daughter to prison,she did say that if something happens to her daughter that she will take fall and say that she did it....and it was the lawyers idea not hers
all that proved is they didn't have such a good relationship with their Mom...nothing more....
@@caribbeanladyz7965 "IT WAS HER LAWYER'S IDEA NOT HERS." And who are they representing? HER! No matter whose idea it's still her trial and she cosigned on that idea 🤣🙄
She's got the gall to sue for false imprisonment but she has to in order to keep the pretense up. Evil woman.
Many done the same, I do believe deeply that he deserves what he got. She was pist.
Worse strategy in her life ever ?! Doesn't sound right at all . I mean this would be an extremely rear life acurence, who didn't disagree with your father, I'm mean after you raise your own kids in your 50's you ohhh that's why he did or said, but to physically hurt your father? Other than talking NO I'm a total Daddy's girl sure I've been mad, but in his 80's when he passed from COVID I sure lost my best friend. I can't say I believe the daughter hurt Dad 🚫 no
She murdered her husband! The evidence is overwhelming
@deevillarreal9475 what!! Lol wtf
It's her right to sue for false imprisonment she was found innocent through DNA testing I know you all like to believe that male DNA doesn't exist but it does any person in the United States falsely imprisoned falsely imprisoned means you were convicted of a crime that you were later found innocent of meaning you did not commit that crime is entitled to sue the state that incarcerated them the city that incarcerated them the police department that arrested them and all other agencies involved I hope she wins I'm so sick of reading all of your guyses bulshit comments about how evil and how disgusting she was of a woman when she didn't do anything there wasn't even a history of domestic violence between those two for all you guys screaming and yelling and bitching take a look at your own lives God forbid somebody walk one of you guys up for something you didn't do and the world say you actually did do it I'll wait that might actually be funn😮y😮😮
Bob had pieces of skull w/ dried blood in his shirt & undershirt (meaning he was dressed after the attack), it rained that day and (MOST TELLING 1:18) there was NO dirt or mud ANYWHERE on his sneakers, even the bottom.His shoes were tied to the wrong side on each shoe.There was enough blood on the mattress to fill a 3 gallon container. That's no nosebleed. And of course they can't test it all. After 30 spots, it's all Bobs. And the body dump scene IRREFUTABLY had her tire tracks there.THIS (obviously guilty) WOMAN IS ASTRONOMICALLY LUCKY to have exploited a few police mistakes ( recall OJ Simpson)to the point of getting her conviction overturned 😮 and she actually wants our pity ?
Really...they said that there were multiple trucks ( tires) all over that area.
@@renayeblack5906 No, HER TRUCK HAD THREE DIFFERENT TIRES ON IT !! ( All of which were at the scene)Who else's truck/car could it have been?
Agree 100%.
She did it!
@@CourtRepKneeckah yes, she did
Does anyone else out there love Erin moriarty voice?
I love it ❤
Yes! It’s so nice xD bless!
It’s distinct. If you heard that voice with nothing but a dark screen you’d know who it was. Kind of like James Earl Jones.
Love waking up to a new 48 Hours episode 😍
Yo waking up n we almost going to sleep
😂@@emuchira196
I have this fire Humboldt County grown California pharmaceutical grade pot, it's the best!
yeah if only they would replace the narrator. She looks nice and sweet and all but her voice is so annoying.
@@christiannielsen3863thank you!!!!! I never watch any episode with her as a narrator. She overdoes it. The dramatic tone, the words, the questions, the pace... she doesn't belong in these type of series.
As Judge Judy would say to her: Madame! Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining!
Never heard this before but it made me laugh . Thank you for sharing !
@@user-nq6mf2gu7z
Really?? JJ and anyone else that old hold seems to hunt for reasons to say it! 😂😅
Right
Right! What’s the alternative?? You can nit pick any investigation. She threw her daughter to the wolves, nice mother.
@@user-er6zk5mt6uif you bothered to watch the whole thing you’d know that they found a third party male dna on bob and Jane’s dna was not found on him. What now? Still want to stand behind your bs theory?
She doesn’t sound like a person who cared about her husband nor does she show any emotions of him being murdered. If anything she’s trying to cover herself
Her very first statement, before I knew what it was about, also gave me that impression.
It was 20 years ago. Plus being in prison for 20 years changes people.
SHE DID IT, PERIOD🙂
Thank you! I was wondering if I was crazy
And all of are totally convinced that you’re 100% correct since you were at the scene and watched the crime happen with your very own eyes…Your judgmental comment is simply your own personal opinion, not an empirical fact…
Are you a Forensic EXPERT ?
Three sides to every story Yours , Theirs, and God Almighty's.
1: Have to ask after having watched several episodes of Forensic Files... WHAT ANGLE does a perpetrator have to stand it, in order to produce blood spatter on three surrounding walls, simultaneously ?
2, What weapon throws blood spatter at three walls, from the exact same distance from the floor?
3. Where were the samples of hair, fingernail content, or transferred evidences from a potential perpetrator stored from 20 years ago ? DNA on other crime stories is "stored " for decades and bought out to be used OFTEN; Why not in THIS CASE ?
Blind Eye is Correct:
Look at what was NOT considered ?
1. hit and run on a curvy road? (How did he get to that area-if he wasn't biking?)
2. No follow-up on the car the witness saw at the crime scene? Why not? (Two men in a pick up truck.?)
Had Bob been a female, MANY DNA samples would have been taken & preserved properly.
3. Love the normal accurateness of "Forty Eight Hours", however, it seems they skipped over Jane's answer to
the question about "when last seen?" Did he go out riding his bike for sure? Did he go walking?
Was he "offended" by that person he met with...as he said, and Jane said , that he said..
HE WENT OUT FOR A JOB!
4. No mention of lie detector test results ANYWHERE ?
5. Whether one witness speaks up or not. A statement by a son who was raised with his own views of his own
homelife or parents' ability to communicate, IT'S STILL A PERSONAL OPINION.SONS do take sides in families-it's not for US to ascertain. They didn't say she was a "bad" mother, they said they thought she did it?
Look at the LIMITED EVIDENCE SHOWN? Why were they not questioned on WHY they came to that opinion? Not very complete.
This does resemble the road to Valley Center...DANGEROUS to ride bikes OR drive btw!
I hope Jane gets reciprocated for her pain and suffering, and soon!
"Man on the Run" and "I Ain't no Middleman,"
VideosToEncourageHumanity
LyndaFayeSmusic@Yahoo
@@lyndafayesmusic Might be helpful to take just half a dose next time…?💜
Why would the daughter NOT testify against her mother, who was accusing her of killing her father? It doesn't make any sense? Did they do it together 🤔
To everyone saying mom and daughter did it together hhow do u explain the male dna?
That's what I think.
Now what I read was she said she would not let her daughter go to jail .that's she would go to jail if it came to that .sad how things get totally out of context ... especially when if some cared to read her entire statement
@@peggypasson8794 doesn't mean to say it's true? 🤔 lol
@@scottaznavourian3720 wonder if the male dna was from the investigator guy clearly touching everything with his bare hands lol
To get a better understanding of this story, you should watch forensic files episode title: The Marathon Man. It gives a better context to this story
Thanks for the tip. Pausing this and going to watch that first. Lol!
I was going to post the same thing , as I just watched it the other day.
Season 7. Episode 39, this lady is as guilty as the day is long and whoever let her out of prison should be ashamed of themselves!
She did it.
I didnt know about this case and just finished watching. I still dont know if she was innocent or guilty, so will watch another doc about this case for sure.
Is that on RUclips? I can’t find it.
I believe Jane committed the crime in the bedroom. But, I also believe Jane had help getting Bob's body to the field. I think there's probably about three people involved with this crime.
She doesn’t come across as honest…something in her demeanor.
I got that feeling as well. I think it was the shifty gaze. I noticed that it went away towards the end of the ordeal but it doesn't necessarily prove guilt.
It’s a testament to who she is allowing her defense to blame her daughter. Innocent or guilty that in itself is absolutely despicable.
"Who"
Agree. It made me grasp for air 😳 It's unbelievable 😱
Exactly. I was having doubts of her innocence, and when I heard that, My mind was made up.
@@dorothykilgallenwasmurdere1653agreed! Evidence points to both mother daughter in on it as both remained silent.
If you bothered to watch the whole thing you’d know she was unequivocally against them saying Claire did it but they did it anyway.
"I can't really explain it" is the gist of her defense when confronted with very compromising evidence.
She doesn't have to explain anything. The prosecution is the one that has to lay out the case against her.
@@JJJJ-gl2ufBut that's why they have 'interrogation', sure she has to give an account. And her response speaks for itself, or as they used to say, and still do in cases like this, res ipsa loquitur, that's all the Latin I know but it says it all. I am so pleased that from what I read here she isn't fooling anyone. Yeah, the nosebleed of the century.
How can she explain something she didn’t do? 🤔 I wouldn’t even attempt to explain something I had nothing to do with u must be nuts
@@CristinaGarcia-Calvo Well since much of that evidence has been disproven don't you think it makes sense now that she couldn't explain it?
She killed her husband! At least she will never get the last 20 years of her life back.
I think daughter and mother did it together because he was trying sale the horses he die over horses smh
Don't feel sorry for Jane, because she's guilty. I saw this episode, the very first episode with her many years ago, and the forensic files episode. She's guilty. Also I don't know why people are acting like women are totally helpless when it comes to moving a dead body. There's another 48 hours episode titled secret and lies on grapevine lake. This woman moved her dead boyfriend's body using a dolly, and sat him on fire in a storm drain. I know of another woman who was a sheriff's deputy who murdered her boyfriend, and moved his body by herself and placed him in concrete. Stop acting like women are helpless.
Definitely...bloody fingerprint on the syringe ? She said he ran on Sunday but he was dead on saturday....all the blood cleanup...yeah, guilty.
She was innocent and she is innocent...guilty ones r the sheriff who leads towards wrongful convictions...they must b fine,ok...they hv ruin the life of vulnerable lady...
@@Mehmood-yn1obI pray you never get picked for jury duty. You’re very naive and gullible. Look at the facts without emotion.
The guilty face always yell that I m guilty ...and she doesn't even look alike...fact was there...how can a person deal a crime scene with bear hands...they just wanted to close the case soon to get appritiated by his so call officers and deppt whatsoever...and my question is what if she is innocent but they ruin her life...its very shameful for everyone of us to hv these kind of things in our system....
@@Mehmood-yn1objust coz the sheriffs botched the investigation doesn’t mean that she’s not guilty. Two things can be true at the same time
I'm having a hard time believing that she is innocent. All the blood in the house is weird, and i read that he was dressed by someone else.
She killed him.
Same so much blood from nose bleeding,,also the food he ate they tested
It is absolutely unclear who’s blood it was, and if it even was blood. Also, many whitnesses saw him jogging and someone saw him in a van with unknown men. Together with the new DNA evidence, I don’t believe she has done it
Based on the sneaker and socks combo I'd say he was dressed in the dark at gunpoint.
She killed him
She is so convincing thats why she raised through the ranks to become an executive. The longer i lived, the more I maintained my work position AND WORK LOAD I see some of these people very very astute in explaining away many things and NOT SKIPPING A BEAT when they lie. Their facade is near darn perfect. The truly good traits mixed in with the openly hidden manipulation. They know they can get away with things.
Yeah, there are for sure studies that show powerful leaders tend to have psychopathic traits.
Thank you 48hours for putting this full episode on
I am a doctor and that blood stain on the mattress is HUGE for a nosebleed. Way more than I would expect from a simple nosebleed. Woman also needs to explain the blood spatter in and around the bedroom - I'm sorry but her dog with an abscess again wouldn't account for that. She is guilty. There's just no way, NO WAY I can buy her lies...
Can u also guess what object could have been used to hit him?
I used to babysit a little girl who would have nosebleeds, and they were big enough to cause that stain. It was as if a faucet of blood was running out of her nose, and it was very difficult to stop.
Did they test that spot to make sure it was his blood? Blood on a mattress my first thought is period...gross but it is an explanation.
@@awesomeanimalsofindia101😂
@@jeweliedee4299 I am sorry but sometimes what appears as "a lot of blood" may be biased by the fear at that point in time. I'm not saying nosebleeds absolutely can't, but for a nosebleed that significant he probably would have had to be rushed to the ER for an emergency consult
It is ridiculous that she agreed her lawyers pointed fingers at her daughter in the first place that makes her damn selfishness and guilt
I agree on that point. I don't see how she could have allowed that, but I don't think she was guilty. Selfishness is not evidence of guilt.
She maybe didn't mind because the daughter had involvement. The divide is telling, both sons being sure she's guilty, but daughter sticking by mother despite guilt being thrown at her by her own mother. Very suspicious. It's enough to cast doubt that the mother didn't do it, that there is a potential for other scenario, that's all defence need.
because they were stuck, when it was obvious it happened in the bedroom
I was in her corner until the point she agreed to let her daughter take the fall for her.
She said she wouldn't allow her daughter to go to jail. She say she would say she was guilty if that happened.
Not you just blindly believing what an accused murderer says
Yeah you missed the boat ob that, she literally said the opposite
That’s the complete opposite of what she said. 🙄
Honestly, u should have awoken earlier. Wtf
She's so 110% guilty. She totally killed him.
She’s a sociopath 100%… after being found guilty and all she had to say was “I couldn’t believe I wasn’t going home, I was sure I would be”, it reminded me of the Dinh Bowman episode where after being found guilty, all he had to say was “I’m disappointed the jury didn’t believe me”
Soooo....now she's going to put forth the same doggedness to find her husband's true killer...right??
Well heck…now that I’ve seen the Forensic Files episode I’m disappointed in 48 Hours’ coverage😑
I LOVE Erin Moriarty. She’s the best!
She doesn't mess around. I swear 48 hours has the most elite journalists. I wonder what they pay them. Is God I have good benefits because Erin has been with them for like 30 years. At first I thought that name Moriarty what's French but then I realized it's Irish/Gaelic...
Yes, Moriarty's a top notch professional at what she does
She was a little hottie on that 20yrs ago and still is
Best at what being somewhat impartial? That woman killed her husband!
@@thomasgentry6201. Exatly 👍🏻
She didn't want to pay alimony
This woman is far from innocent...miles away.
Who nosebleeds so much that they soak a carpet that much?
I very much enjoy how 48 Hours presents their stories. They truly are the gold standard! At first I thought she might be innocent, but hearing from her sons, nope, guilty.
I think Jane and her daughter are guilty as hell.
This right here
There will always be idiots on the internet.
@@gigiis526 kindness is free..why name calling..not nice!
Is it too much to ask if it was possible to determing if the blood found in the bedroom was human, horse, or dog?
they knew it was his, they tested it, the defense had to admit it happened in the bedroom
It was her husband’s blood shown by the DNA testing
Exactly
I was VERY confused about THAT one…I mean, although, DNA forensics had BEEN been involved in solving cases, by the early 2000s, I think even decades BEFORE that, science, they were able to differentiate human blood from a dang ANIMAL’S⁉️⁉️
How would horse blood get into their bedroom? Be serious
I'm 12 mins in and she is lying. And guilty as sin.
You can put on a dog and pony show against anything. That’s all lawyers do. She’s guilty.
14:49 is the moment I thought, "You did it." The way she answered that nose bleed question.
If she divorced she lost her horse farm. He was tired of financing her horses because they cost a fortune.
Jane makes no eye contact, constantly blinking instead.
No one treating horses with injections walks the syringes from the barn to not only a kitchen waste basket but all the way into their bathroom. There is always waste in a barn. You don't walk it into your person bathroom and into that waste basket.
Did you listen? She was the bread winner
@@elainebird58 Did YOU listen and or even watch??? Do it again, cupcake, you obviously missed it.
She didn't want to pay alimony they'
were married for decades&that is suspicious why would she by past other garbage cans to throw it away in bedroom bathroom.
@@ponygirlusa That 'cupcake' so less jarring than 'idiots'.
She's too cool, calm and collected - a very common characteristic of killers....
Maybe the daughter and mother did it together.
That's what I'm thinking.
That theory is the only way I can imagine Jane being able to dress Bob after he is already dead or drugged and move his body to the location it was found. I don't think Jane could do that unassisted. She would have to have someone to help her.
I see it the same way.
@@rebeccawebb2298 That's what I said. People don't realize how hard it is to lift 180 pounds of dead weight. I think she had help!
She did it!
None of the "new evidence" proves her innocence. If you listen to every word he attorneys use, they don't say she was totally innocent. They just try to pick it apart.
Example: A neighbor "thought she might have seen Bob riding in a truck with 2 men." Jane said, "If all of that evidence had been shown during the trial..." ALL that evidence? One person saying she might have seen him?
Also, the blood that was tested was shown to be his. Who has a horrible bloody nose by the wood stove, goes to bed to let it pour out there, and then turns the mattress over without cleaning it?
Jane and her daughter are very strange, at the very least. There may not be sufficient evidence to convict her beyond a reasonable doubt, but that doesn't mean she's innocent.
Her own kids testifying for the prosecution speaks volumes. She did it.
No, not really. They spoke of their parents 'marriage' as how they saw it as children. All couples have verbal arguments.
Im literally obsessed with this channel ❤Good morning yall
Good afternoon from Turkiye !🙋🏼♀️
Good day from Germany 🍻
The absolute best channel ❤
Good Afternoon from South Africa 🇿🇦
You are using the word literally incorrectly.
Good morning from California. I love this program too.
How would he go on a jog with so many injuries? That blood did not come from nowhere.
The police argued he never went for a run. They believed she killed him in their bedroom and then dressed him in his jogging clothes.
Her tire tracks were found where she dumped his body. He did not go for a jog cause he was killed in the house.
Did you not listen? He left for the jog before he was attacked.
@@loudloveenand the police were, as usual, wrong
idk...the fact that she doesn't seem at all interested in who might have "actually" killed her husband is odd. She didn't mention justice for him at all!
She is interested and said, he went out for a jog and that's all she knew, she doesn't know what happened.
So so happy for this lady law enforcement can make mistakes but she must go on and enjoy her life
Are we not gonna talk about the tire tracks found at the scene?!?
They did talk about them and it was said it could be any number of vehicles in the area. That is why that evidence was not permitted at the second trial.
Exactly. Too many points of evidence in this case pointed no where but to Jane. At least she has been found guilty and has served time.
They dismissed it because too many trucks could have that tire track LOL. What in the world.
Watch the Forensic files episode. There were three different types of tires on the vehicle at the scene. Two of the same type of tires on the front and two different tires on the rear. All three tire types were identified. They knew it was a pickup truck. Jane’s truck was a perfect match. The woman is guilty as F.
@@gregv2821 I'll have to watch that later. I don't trust pattern-recognition forensic "science" as a rule. Most of it has been shown to be very inaccurate. I think there's plenty of other reasons to think it's her, but just the fact that the prosecution didn't go forward with a second trial leans a bit to the conclusion that the tire track evidence isn't all that it was cracked up to be.
Why would they bring up the dog blood? Such an easily dispelled thing. That woman must have been a real gem to have your own kids testify against you.
Fortyeight Hours is often a source of sanity for me. They follow the facts. In hindsight, it all fits together.
Jane is as guilty as guilty can be. Wow.
I believe she is guilty. She was controling, bossy. The way her sons testified against her, the way she agreed to throw her daughter under the bus. And a stack of evidence, the lack of other suspects. L the blood and the syringe and the rope, the tyre traces. It all can be explained separately, but the way it all looks as a whole...
Come on. She did it.
my exact thoughts, no doubt about it
Yep, she did do it!! It all fits! And her daughter could have helped?
She totally did it. Her reasons for denying evidence were laughable.
She killed him, all the evidence could not be a coincidence.
Police would know the difference between dog blood and human blood😢
You would think, right?
Mammal blood looks the same. Police wouldn’t know. A detective wouldn’t know. It takes lab tests to determine what kind of blood it is, if it is blood.
Mammal blood looks the same. Police wouldn’t know. A detective wouldn’t know. It takes lab tests to determine what kind of blood it is, if it is blood.
Mammal blood looks the same. Police wouldn’t know. A detective wouldn’t know. It takes lab tests to determine what kind of blood it is, if it is blood.
Not without testing done in a lab. With the human eye it looks the same.
If she didn’t do it directly, she certainly knows who did. This episode is hyper focused on proving her innocence, however, if you focus on certain aspects it’s very clear she is acting highly suspicious. I believe one of the most critical pieces of evidence is the fact that his food hadn’t digested. I truly believe he was killed that night and she didn’t call until 7:45PM the following night because she (or they if another person) had to figure out what to do with him.
Nonsense. Presumed innocent until proven guilty. Plus the other DNA partial profile that was not hers.
If you were put in prison for a crime you didn't commit i'm sure you would be hyper focused on proving your innocents too.
I remember the case from one of these shows years ago. She did it. I remember thinking it can’t be but as the show went on and more evidence was revealed, I had no choice but to come to the conclusion that she was guilty
She absolutely did it.
This Dame screams guilt... but the producers of this show/episode follow rule number one in the journalism handbook "Never let the truth get in the way of a great story" RIP Bob.
This doesn't feel like a great story. She comes off as guilty (nothing compelling makes her look innocent) and LE made mistakes enough to get her conviction overturned.
Wow this episode is EXTREMELY biased towards the wife’s innocence. Very biased. Read the actual story, 48 hours this is bs really. I’m all for the wrongly convicted but SHE KILLED HER HUSBAND WITH FULL EVIDENCE.
Erin Moriarty is a great narrator.
The worst of them all
i think she did it.... that blood stain on the mattress is alot
Shouldn't this be without bias? This is so biased in her favor I feel disgusted. She's guilty. She got exonerated over small bs, not because there was proof of her innocence.
I agree. There are cases where the wrong person was found guilty, but in my opinion, this is not one of them. Her explanations about things were completely bizarre and for me, completely unbelievable. At least they were to me. If I'd have been on the jury, I would have easily voted guilty.
@@cathyprosser1050 That's the thing, so much goes against her yet she gives ridiculous excuses. State dropped the ball with this case and she got lucky. But at least she did almost two decades in prison, so some punishment.
It’s not about proof of innocence it’s beyond a reasonable doubt.
@@admirallily Oh, please, idea is clear of what I meant. She's guilty as sin, just State messed it up and couldn't prove it, like you say, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Agreed
I don't believe this lady.. there's way too much evidence and her response is, I can't explain this, I can't explain that... nope you did it
Idk, I feel like usually the obviously guilty people have answers for everything.
@Yoyohohojujujah She did have an answer about the syringe, Bob's stomach contents possibly related to him eating leftovers, Bob telling her that his nose bled on mattress to name a few.
@@msw8839 - her explanation about the syringe was that Bob had a nosebleed, tossed a bloody tissue into the same garbage as she'd thrown the syringe. If that's the case....why isn't there a bloody tissue in that garbage along with the syringe. There isn't one. Also: her fingerprint was IN the blood.
🙏👍
My daughter has nose bleeds and no way.Does somebody just let blood pour out of their nose without putting a hand up there or putting their head back... I think something would be terribly wrong if you lost that much blood... And?
Look there, he's dead.
We see it too often - revision of evidence clearly exonerating defendant, but Prosecutors insanely refusing to admit it
How did she move him from the bedroom to the truck without a long trail of blood? Did she wrap him up and toss him over her shoulder? How did he get in the truck? Was his blood in the truck?
All questions I wondered about as well.
she cleaned it up
She had a day to clean it up
Easy move body on dolly
She's a horsewoman - which means she's very well versed in handling heavy things like feed bags, saddles, etc. She would also have dollies and other items to move those type of heavy items. Wrap the body. Voila.
How is there SO MUCH blood in the house?
She did it and the daughter help her … she knows she’s guilty
ok, just watched the forensic files episode on this called the marathon man and she's 100 percent guilty. Listen to this.. At the crime scene there were tire inprints.. All four tires were different and ALL FOUR tires matched the tires of the wife's truck. So that kind of a coincidence is basically not possible, it can't have been any other car to have all four tires different and matching up perfectly. That truck was there at the crime scene
And I can't believe that evidence wasn't allowed in the second hearing trial whatever
yes, it's crazy.. Also they found rope matching the one he was strangled with in the house where they lived@@KimberlyBishh
Investigators took off their shoes and noticed the wet carpeting
Unless the evidence on all four is bogus in the same way. There must be a reason that the prosecution didn't go forward with a second trial, and I suspect it's because that evidence is flawed or would be inadmissible. (Pattern recognition type forensic science as a whole has since been shown to barely be worth the effort, and just flat-out wrong a whole lot of the time. Obviously I have no idea of the quality of this particular evidence; I'm just speculating.)
Yeah I noticed they also said here all the different tyres matched. There's no way that can be coincidence.
How do allow your coucil to point the blame on your daughter, when that fails then you blame them for being incompetent. She said it herself, if her daughter gets in trouble then she would say she (mother) did it, so if she(mother) knows her daughter didn't do it, then why would she even allow the defense to use it as a defense strategy to begin with? She could just fire them right then and there. This shows she would do absolutely anything to get away with it.
they are the reasonable doubt establishers. Casey Anthonys family did the same thing by George taking the blame.