As Published On
→ The Out-Lawyer’s
Blog: http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog1
And
The Policy Think Site: http://www.jaygaskill.com
All
contents, unless otherwise indicated are
Copyright ©
2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 by Jay B. Gaskill
Permission to publish, distribute or print all or
part of this article (except for personal use) is needed. [Permission for use
in group discussions is almost always routinely given.]
Please contact Jay B. Gaskill, attorney at law, via
e mail at law@jaygaskill.com
Print version -- http://jaygaskill.com/ReiserTimeLine.htm
About That Critical
Time Line:
Yesterday’s post referenced a lengthy reintroduction to the Han Reiser case with a newly produced hypothetical time line (What did Hans do & when?). for those of you who have been closely following the case, the timeline follows this abbreviated setting. Brief comments then follow.
BACKGROUND
Nina was last seen alive (by anyone except her killer) at
approximately
What happened between
The jury will soon be trying to imagine a scenario in which
Hans’s could murder Nina out of sight of any witness, then dispose of the body
in the hours following
I think the DA may be able to argue that Hans accomplished several things that weekend: (1) He quietly killed his wife. (2) He temporarily put Nina’s body in the passenger seat of “his” car, that Honda CRX. (3) He moved Nina’s car to the place where it was eventually found. (4) He disposed of the body somewhere. (5) He washed his car in order to remove all Nina traces (the corpse might have begun to deteriorate by then). (6) Eventually, as police attention on him intensified, Hans removed and disposed of the CRX passenger seat.
How long would all that take? How much “alone” time did Hans have? It is very hard to conceal a human corpse for more than 12 hours without generating horrendous odors.
ONE HYPOTHETICAL TIMELINE
I’m indebted
to Professor Maria Chang (political science, university if
Recall
that two days after Nina’s last visit, on Sept 5, Hans gets a call from his
mother at around
If – as
we will assume for purposes of this hypothetical narrative - that Reiser has
killed Nina but hasn’t yet figured out what to do with her remains, Hans knows
he must now quickly dispose of the body. And he has but a few hours to
accomplish that.
So he
drives the CRX somewhere within a 2 to 3 hour
perimeter & accomplishes at least a temporary disposal. [I note that this
theory would then entail a further attempt to move the body to a more secure
location still – say outside the Tahoe area?]
This
urgent drive is stressful & exhausting. This theory explains why - when
Hans shows up at Mark’s house that night, driving not the CRX
but Mom’s hybrid —he is so exhausted that he must lie down on Mark’s couch in
the living room to rest before he can drive his mother home.
After
his mother goes to bed, Hans then takes the CRX out
onto the driveway to hose it down – presumably to wash away incriminating
evidence. This soaks the car floor & possibly gets water into the gas tank.
That may explain why, on Sept 10, Hans buys a bottle of Valvoline
fuel-dryer at Kragen Auto in
The jury
will probably assume that Hans had not yet removed the passenger seat on Sept 5
when he is seen by neighbor Jack Stabb hosing
something in his driveway. [Hans may still think at this early point that he
can wash away all the incriminating evidence, but seat fabric can retail
biological traces.] The officer who
gives Hans a ticket on Sept 12 does not report seeing anything unusual about
the car. This is a close call – assuming Hans is the killer. The jury will also
likely infer that Hans is so spooked by this encounter that he resolves to not
drive the CRX.
Did Hans
take – or plan to take the car to
Hans may
well have removed the passenger seat on Sept 17. That day, he was in
Apparently
Hans changed his mind about renting a locker to store the CRX.
Instead, he rented a U-Haul truck for a one-way trip from
When the
CRX was recovered, the police noticed that the
passenger seat was missing. It was taken to crime technicians the next morning
who eventually found traces of Nina’s blood and that of the defendant.
Was the
We can
reasonably suspect (again as we pursue the hypothetical path of a killer
seeking to hide evidence) that Hans’ goal was to move something from somewhere
near
COMMENTS
I expect the
defendant to testify in this case for a simple reason: Assume
he says - - as I expect he will say – that he last saw his wife alive
when he left the house on September 3, 2006 and he has had no contact with her
since. Then if only one juror chooses believe him, there can be no conviction
of murder.
Of course, if Hans
is trapped in a lie, all bets are off….
If Hans testifies,
you can expect the defense to quickly rest its case. Why?
Everything Hans says - - where he
disposed of the car seat, what he was doing in Truckee, and so on – is subject
to investigation and possible rebuttal.
The DA’s investigators will have very little time to do this. Expect the DA to put on some minor rebuttal
witnesses to buy time, hoping for a long weekend recess. The investigators will be working overtime.
JBG