The Out-Lawyer's Blog

I suspect that any deal is contingent on a full allocution and the waiving of any potential appeals.

What I find interesting about this revelation is that the burial site was so close to the house, in the obvious location of Redwood Regional Park, yet was not found. From this I conclude that the search of the area was poorly organized and conducted, and if they used a cadaver dog, it wasn't a particularly good one.

The fact that the body was found in a 4x4x4 ft grave and the time it takes to dig out that much earth would indicate that Hans had dug the grave in preparation for killing Nina.

4ft is about 1.2m or 120cm. Cubed it is 1 728 000 cm^3. With a soil density of 1.3g/cm^3, it is two tons of soil - not something you dig up in a hurry when you have to hide a dead body fast, fast, fast.

So my question is this: If the bargain was to show the body in exchange for 2nd degree, and the showing of the body strongly strengthens the case for a 1st degree murder conviction, can Reiser still be sentenced to 1st degree, or is a dead a deal?

The preceding poster jumps to an unwarranted conclusion. The grave was reported as 4x4, but not necessafily four feet deep. Furthermore, this was just the reporter's estimate based on the coroner's excavation; the area of the excavation at the time of burial may be smaller. A 3x3 area is only a little more than half that of a 4x4 area. Of course, the original excavation would not likely have been square anyway. I estimate about 600 lbs per foot of depth, and 2 and 1/2 feet depth. He had plenty of time after the fact to do this.

It was reported as being four feet deep on the
Wired blogs site.

@Gary A: from http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/07/cops-judge-agre.html

"The 44-year-old defendant brought authorities to a wooded area, pictured right, about a half mile from his house on Monday, where her body was found in a 4-foot-deep grave"

The sfgate article talks about a 4x4 ft grave, and this other says 4ft deep. At 600lbs/ft, that's 2400lbs of soil or about a ton.

I'd still say it takes a little bit of digging to get that much soil excavated.

The news media has a tendency to get facts wrong all the time in their haste to "scoop." Even though Wired said the grave was 4' deep, we can't take their word for it. The over-riding say-so would come from the authorities doing the digging/investigating.

The big question to me is pre-meditated or not? It could have been either way, only Hans knows for sure and so far he ain't sayin'.

Regarding the Wired article, don't believe everything you read on the web. Several sources reported the grave was "shallow," which would be normal for an impromptu burial under time constraints.

All the evidence suggests that Hans dug the grave shortly after the murder. Whatever the size of the hole, it was sufficient to do the job, and possible to dig in the time he had available. To conclude that he must have dug it ahead of time merely because some careless reporter states that it was four feet deep is ridiculous.

"All the evidence suggests that Hans dug the grave shortly after the murder."

What evidence, Gary? I haven't seen/read about any evidence regarding the gravesite other than what is reported in the media. Do you have an inside scoop?

@Gary, Mary: Ok, suppose it was a shallow grave. Maybe the media is all wrong.

But my question remains: What if Hans, when he tells "what really happened", confesses that yeah, he had been planning this for months and months. Does the deal still stand and he gets murder 2, or can the DA back out of it?

Good comments, but there is no quick, non-deliberate fatal choking. I agree that first degree 187 was thin but the evidence supports the jury's finding. Not to say that the DA doesn't have solid reasons for the deal, however...
JBG

There may well have been premediation (which doesn't require much), but not to the extent of preparing a grave beforehand. Just from following the trial carefully, together with recent disclosures, we know what happened. HR sent the children downstairs; he argued with Nina and killed her with a choke hold (a quick and silent method); he put the body in a bag and stashed it on the property temporarily (partially witnessed by the son); he took the children on an outing in the Oakland hills the next day to scout the terrain for disposal of the body; he subsequently moved the body to the burial site when he did not have the children to look after; he dug a hole sufficient to do the job - the precise configuration of the hole cannot be determined from reports of the coroner's excavation, but he would certainly not have needed to remove 64 cubic feet of soil, as has been suggested. This is the simplest explanation consistent with HR's behavior after the killing. There is no need to suppose that the murder was planned in advance to the extent of preparing a gravesite beforehand. Had he done that, he could have buried the body that same night, in which case he would have taken the children some place entirely different the next day.

It takes up to eight minutes to die from choking. Having blocked the airway, the perp. who then fails to call for help can be said to deliberately intend the death. That time factor supports a first degree murder. Before the body was discovered, it was all speculation. At this point we still don't know whether there is forensic support for strangulation or not.
JBG

but there is no quick, non-deliberate fatal choking

Please note that I am not suggesting that Nina's death was an accident, merely that other people have had unintended accidental deaths from the use of Judo choke holds.