The Murder of Rob and Michele Reiner in Brentwood, California

I’m watching a live report that Rob Reiner and his wife were stabbed to death in Brentwood and it might’ve been by Rob‘s son. Still waiting for verification.

 

[GrandmaBear]

There's video of Nick nonchalantly walking along streets both before and after the murders. He appears to be in complete control of his faculties. That will be a hard sell for a jury.

Yep, think i saw that yesterday and my word for it too is nonchalant that I had for it. Just normal, casual, not a care in the world. I heard another good point today and that's about their neighborhood in general and if even the Reiners didn't have cameras which they likely did, and security, that so many neighbors would have that we've probably not even seen CLOSE to what they have. The little bit released is tightening up the timeline already.

My first thought from the start was that they were killed in bed and very possibly asleep. Many did not think so but now the timeline is starting to indicate that might be the case.

Another thing I'll mention only because not sure all have heard it just as some of us hadn't known about the guesthouse, and might not know this, and I didn't at first it sthat

DARN it, I forgot what I was going to say right there!! Just lost the thought. I HATE that that happened. if it comes back to me I'll add in later on. It was a point I don't think about the videos or the cameras, but maybe it was or one of them triggered the thought as I was talking of it... DARN IT $@#$%@ as now I forgot.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I just saw that Nick is not medically cleared yet. I think we all know where this is going.

It's about the only option there is but there are too many things/facts to reach the high bar of NG by reason of insanity but maybe try to play mental issues as a part of a case to waht, get sympathy from one juror maybe or to mitigate it for sentencing or who knows... This case far faster than Kohberger is showing facts that have Nick hemmed in in just about every which way. imaginable. With the little we know for facts. Already it is that way.

What else is there? Self defense? Well first if they died in their beds asleep then there goes that one. And I won't get started on his age and theirs and all the other reasons that would never fly.

Gol darn it, I thought of the thing I was going to say right in the midst of that last sentence and by the time I finished I forgot AGAIN. Next time I am going to promptly type it in the middle so I remember it and then cut and move it! Showing I can't hold two trains of thoughts these days, I have to finish one first and then the other that might have popped into the head disappears.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I would be very surprised if that were the case. I don't think the estate would even be released for such or even so soon.

There may only be the property and it would also depend on any will. Have never heard before where the victim has funded the defence of the murderer.

Maybe you know of a similar situation when this has happened before. Generally a murderer cannot profit from his crime though, can he?

Happens all of the time. Morphew. It's a huge mistake and loophole for lack of a better word. In Walshe today, such was hinted at and there was nothing the judge could do to make that right. There are either no laws about it OR they get around them by the time such is upheld and transfer assets or use them, etc. Chad Daybell, where'd his money come from? Tammy. For private counsel. I get not all of these are parents/child but husband/wife but it's the same. It happens ALL of the time. OR it's the life insurance even if the wife didn't have the assets OR it's their half of the assets meaning if they divorced, they'd lose half of everything most likely but if they kill her they get it ALL. It is a BIG problem. But it isn't something cops deal with, they are about the crime, and laws often lack if the family tries to get something done about it especially in the criminal case. Larry Millette and Maya. Even Lori Daybell benefited off her children. Not sure on the Menendez brothers with their parents as far as private defense but it was their goal imo to have all the parents owned. Yep, I've bitched about it in more than one case. And it IS a problem here. A BIG ONE. I did a post re the CA slayer's law above. BUt that's only when they are convicted. You know when some cases can take ten years to go to trial, all mostly a minimum of three, those assets are GONE by then. They either spent them on the attorney, hid them or spent them on something else.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I heard it said by someone who said themselves, they can't substantiate it but that it did come from someone who would know, that Nick tried to mortgage "his" home which I guess meant the guest house, or tried to put it up for bond or get an atty or something I think is what it actually was/or for an atty, and someone in the family said NO. She wasn't even sure it related to this case in the family and not troubles before but if this one, which it SEEMED to be, the family or all of them at least are not going to help him out... They could be divided I guess...

But point is, if the children are for their parents and done with Nick, or some are and some aren't, any will or inheritance efforts by Nick, will likely be contested by some member of the family. Hopefully that would keep anything from coming to him any time soon.

 

[Tresir]

Happens all of the time. Morphew. It's a huge mistake and loophole for lack of a better word. In Walshe today, such was hinted at and there was nothing the judge could do to make that right. There are either no laws about it OR they get around them by the time such is upheld and transfer assets or use them, etc. Chad Daybell, where'd his money come from? Tammy. For private counsel. I get not all of these are parents/child but husband/wife but it's the same. It happens ALL of the time. OR it's the life insurance even if the wife didn't have the assets OR it's their half of the assets meaning if they divorced, they'd lose half of everything most likely but if they kill her they get it ALL. It is a BIG problem. But it isn't something cops deal with, they are about the crime, and laws often lack if the family tries to get something done about it especially in the criminal case. Larry Millette and Maya. Even Lori Daybell benefited off her children. Not sure on the Menendez brothers with their parents as far as private defense but it was their goal imo to have all the parents owned. Yep, I've bitched about it in more than one case. And it IS a problem here. A BIG ONE. I did a post re the CA slayer's law above. BUt that's only when they are convicted. You know when some cases can take ten years to go to trial, all mostly a minimum of three, those assets are GONE by then. They either spent them on the attorney, hid them or spent them on something else.

I think it's different if the accused is actually on the deeds, as in Morphew. They would legitimately own part of the assets so could borrow off them. In this case his name is probably not on the deeds. So the executors of the estate would make any decision. IMO.

 

[Tresir]

Rob and Michele Reiner’s cause of death released by medical examiner

The Reiners’ bodies were discovered on Sunday at their home in Los Angeles. Their son Nick was later arrested and charged with two counts of first-degree murder and has since appeared in court

www.theguardian.com

The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner has released reports stating the cause of death of the film director Rob Reiner and his wife, the photographer Michele Singer Reiner.
Both are listed on the organisation’s website with the cause given as “multiple sharp force injuries” and “homicide” stated as the manner of death. The date of death, which had been the subject of some speculation, is given as Sunday 14 December.

View image in fullscreen
A courtroom sketch of Nick Reiner, wearing a blue protective vest, making his first court appearance on murder charges for the killing of his parents Rob and Michele Singer Reiner on 17 December. Photograph: Mona Edwards/Reuters

The Reiners’ bodies were discovered on Sunday at their home in Brentwood, Los Angeles after their daughter Romy went to check on them. Their son Nick was arrested later the same day and has been subsequently charged with two counts of first-degree murder, and the use of a dangerous weapon, a knife.
Nick Reiner appeared in court on Wednesday but did not enter a plea. Reporters inside the courtroom said he was hidden from view until the end of the hearing; he appeared to be shackled and wearing a suicide prevention vest. He spoke only once, saying “Yes, your honour”, to respond to a question from the judge who asked if he understood his right to a speedy trial process. He is due to return to court for an arraignment hearing on 7 January.
Rob Reiner’s peers in the entertainment industry have continued to post tributes, with Meg Ryan, star of Reiner’s hit romcom When Harry Met Sally, writing: “Thank you for your faith in the best in people, and for your profound love of our country.”
Rob and Michele Reiner’s children Romy and Jake also released a statement to People magazine, saying: “Words cannot even begin to describe the unimaginable pain we are experiencing every moment of the day. The horrific and devastating loss of our parents, Rob and Michele Reiner, is something that no one should ever experience. They weren’t just our parents; they were our best friends.”
The release of Reiner’s final film, a concert movie featuring Spinal Tap playing at Stonehenge, has been delayed.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I think it's different if the accused is actually on the deeds, as in Morphew. They would legitimately own part of the assets so could borrow off them. In this case his name is probably not on the deeds. So the executors of the estate would make any decision. IMO.

it's different but it's the same in that the criminal cases don't really have ways to deal with that end of things or even want to. And even where there are any kinds of laws or even civil laws by the time a suit is filed and gets to court, the assets are gone or moved. No court basically goes and does a thing about it or has the manpower and ability to do so. Or a civil court will issue a judgment, judgment doesn't get paid, there are no criminal or LE options to make them pay. You have to go back and try to garnish wages or find out if they are working (if not a convict) to get them to pay it back (while out, like in Morphew) and even then LE is not involved. They could maybe try for a warrant but I'm just saying it's impossible.

Even this slayer statute in CA, that is for AFTER conviction. By then all of that money could be long gone, on Alan Jackson alone IF Nick is in the will, etc. Hopefully the family will contest the will but there could even be what they call CODs in some area and PODs in other areas. That is where the account pays on demand (POD) or pays cash on demand (COD). Those don't go through probate. It bypasses it and those accounts have to pay to those named immediately on demand after death. So while someone as rich as the Reiners may not have anything like that, I'm sure or would hope they had an estate lawyer and it was all well figured and maybe hopefully they even had some conditions on Nick, like a trust, but I don't know, they really were soft I think where he was concerned in many ways.

But back to the point, I know it's different but it isn't in trying to prevent a likely perp from running through assets gained from the death of the person they caused the death of or using them for their own defense of that. It's so WRONG.

And I am a big believer in something needs to be done about it.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Not sure if all know, but Romy discovered her dad dead and not her mom, not both, it sounds like. And called for help and then was told her mom was dead too. For what that's worth.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Sunday could mean anything from after midnight by just a bit to being like that cruise ship death where announced when help arrived and confirmed dead and not the actual TOD. There will now be 100 shows and news articles out there about this. Everyone almost is taking this one and running with it. This case.

The timeline is being tightened though even for the public with the more videos released and facts that come out in court.

From what I heard from someone who was in the courtroom, I forget who, it was a guest on someone's show that was former FBI I think, but not SURE where I heard it, but it was from someone in the courtroom, maybe it was Brian Entin in fact, Nick looked better than he ever did in any pictures we had. yeah, I think it may have been Entin and then I heard a guest on another show responding to that fact, and saying yeah, how they never are cleaner cut than when in court and faced with their crimes. I'm sure too that Jackson probably made sure of it. That last bit is my opinion.

 

[Kimster]

it's different but it's the same in that the criminal cases don't really have ways to deal with that end of things or even want to. And even where there are any kinds of laws or even civil laws by the time a suit is filed and gets to court, the assets are gone or moved. No court basically goes and does a thing about it or has the manpower and ability to do so. Or a civil court will issue a judgment, judgment doesn't get paid, there are no criminal or LE options to make them pay. You have to go back and try to garnish wages or find out if they are working (if not a convict) to get them to pay it back (while out, like in Morphew) and even then LE is not involved. They could maybe try for a warrant but I'm just saying it's impossible.

Even this slayer statute in CA, that is for AFTER conviction. By then all of that money could be long gone, on Alan Jackson alone IF Nick is in the will, etc. Hopefully the family will contest the will but there could even be what they call CODs in some area and PODs in other areas. That is where the account pays on demand (POD) or pays cash on demand (COD). Those don't go through probate. It bypasses it and those accounts have to pay to those named immediately on demand after death. So while someone as rich as the Reiners may not have anything like that, I'm sure or would hope they had an estate lawyer and it was all well figured and maybe hopefully they even had some conditions on Nick, like a trust, but I don't know, they really were soft I think where he was concerned in many ways.

But back to the point, I know it's different but it isn't in trying to prevent a likely perp from running through assets gained from the death of the person they caused the death of or using them for their own defense of that. It's so WRONG.

And I am a big believer in something needs to be done about it.

I’ve been thinking about the money being used before conviction, too. But I think they probably put a hold on it? I didn’t read the whole statute. But why have a statute if the person can use up all the money before conviction?

 

[Kimster]

Sunday could mean anything from after midnight by just a bit to being like that cruise ship death where announced when help arrived and confirmed dead and not the actual TOD. There will now be 100 shows and news articles out there about this. Everyone almost is taking this one and running with it. This case.

The timeline is being tightened though even for the public with the more videos released and facts that come out in court.

From what I heard from someone who was in the courtroom, I forget who, it was a guest on someone's show that was former FBI I think, but not SURE where I heard it, but it was from someone in the courtroom, maybe it was Brian Entin in fact, Nick looked better than he ever did in any pictures we had. yeah, I think it may have been Entin and then I heard a guest on another show responding to that fact, and saying yeah, how they never are cleaner cut than when in court and faced with their crimes. I'm sure too that Jackson probably made sure of it. That last bit is my opinion.

Why have your client look clean cut if you’re going for an insanity defense?

Maybe he’s not going for an insanity defense.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I’ve been thinking about the money being used before conviction, too. But I think they probably put a hold on it? I didn’t read the whole statute. But why have a statute if the person can use up all the money before conviction?

The show I heard that on, a good one, with real experts in the field, the woman said there was one time she thought she could recall when requested a judge put the hold on/did the slayer thing before conviction but she was unsure how many would actually do that or if they really have a right to do that if challenged I think if I recall? I haven't read the actual statute. But generally no, they have time to use it until conviction and we sure know how long some of those take these days, years on end, and even more so in contested or very serious murder cases.

We have so many cases I wonder or gripe about this and most of the public does in many of which the person is killed for profit and then that person ends up using that money to defend against murder charges for killing the very person they killed for it. It's just SICK. But it isn't the primary focus of the criminal part and their hands are tied anyhow usually as is what that judge pretty much said in the Walshe sentencing the other day.

Now I get a person is entitled to a defense and they are not convicted. I get too where in a wife/husband situation, to be fair in many cases and in many states, it can be considered the murdering spouse owns 1/2 of much or contributed too. I think they deserve to use what they have for a defense, that's only fair really as they may not be guilty but I think something like putting a hold on 1/2 of the estate should be allowed. Or wahtever they can guesstimate he would be entitled to fairly by ownership, etc. in a divorce.

Now in the case of a kid kills the parents, they are entitled to nothing like by marriage, etc., they did not contribute to their wealth. So there isn't any like basis there for that. BUT something can and should be done and the slayer law I am sure was meant to help that but courts are too slow too even if it went into place before conviction. And once they've spent it, I have hardly ever heard of it being recovered and they can't pay it back even if ordered as they are generally in prison. There needs to be some automatic hold of funds in both cases and in the case of parents, maybe all of it held from him whether he inherited or not.

Now it could be held up in probate probably forever and the siblings could use the fact he is charged, there is a lot of evidence and that there will very likely be a conviction and then the slayer law would apply and a probate judge would likely go for that. But who knows if the siblings won't have a soft spot for Nick? It's a tough one, your parents AND your brother. But it would only take one contesting anything to probably hold it up for all. Imo. Or it should work that way.

Would Jackson represent him against the rest of the family? Or get someone to do it? I suspect as I've heard that Jackson knew the parents and maybe they'd used him before. Not sure though. I do believe some family member was calling around to high powered attorneys for representation of Nick. No idea which one, whether a sibling, cousin, uncle, no idea. So someone is at least on his side in helping him find represesntation. That's the account I've heard that I believe and that was on Courtroom Confidential, a show well worth watching.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Why have your client look clean cut if you’re going for an insanity defense?

Maybe he’s not going for an insanity defense.

So true I thought but then I thought does no one insane ever look clean cut and I had to chuckle.

But yeah, I get your meaning totally. You make them look clean cut if you want a perfect, goodie two shoe, law abiding or whatever image. If you want an insane image you go for a Manson look or some such, not a Ted Bundy look.

 

[Tresir]

it's different but it's the same in that the criminal cases don't really have ways to deal with that end of things or even want to. And even where there are any kinds of laws or even civil laws by the time a suit is filed and gets to court, the assets are gone or moved. No court basically goes and does a thing about it or has the manpower and ability to do so. Or a civil court will issue a judgment, judgment doesn't get paid, there are no criminal or LE options to make them pay. You have to go back and try to garnish wages or find out if they are working (if not a convict) to get them to pay it back (while out, like in Morphew) and even then LE is not involved. They could maybe try for a warrant but I'm just saying it's impossible.

Even this slayer statute in CA, that is for AFTER conviction. By then all of that money could be long gone, on Alan Jackson alone IF Nick is in the will, etc. Hopefully the family will contest the will but there could even be what they call CODs in some area and PODs in other areas. That is where the account pays on demand (POD) or pays cash on demand (COD). Those don't go through probate. It bypasses it and those accounts have to pay to those named immediately on demand after death. So while someone as rich as the Reiners may not have anything like that, I'm sure or would hope they had an estate lawyer and it was all well figured and maybe hopefully they even had some conditions on Nick, like a trust, but I don't know, they really were soft I think where he was concerned in many ways.

But back to the point, I know it's different but it isn't in trying to prevent a likely perp from running through assets gained from the death of the person they caused the death of or using them for their own defense of that. It's so WRONG.

And I am a big believer in something needs to be done about it.

There will be a will and executor at a minimum so it is down to the executor. If they have 3 children then the estate will likely have been left to them equally. Normally there is a living spouse, but not in this situation.

In Morphew there was a living spouse and two children IIRC, although i think they were divorced or separated so they may not have had an up to date will.

In this case there is reportedly a $200 million estate between 3 children so approx $67 million each. Plenty from his share alone to pay legal fees.

Probably why Alan Jackson is on the case.

 

[GrandmaBear]

There will be a will and executor at a minimum so it is down to the executor. If they have 3 children then the estate will likely have been left to them equally. Normally there is a living spouse, but not in this situation.

In Morphew there was a living spouse and two children IIRC, although i think they were divorced or separated so they may not have had an up to date will.

In this case there is reportedly a $200 million estate between 3 children so approx $67 million each. Plenty from his share alone to pay legal fees.

Probably why Alan Jackson is on the case.

There are I think four children if one includes the stepdaughter from Penny Marshall he legally adopted. She is mentioned as much but I'd hope he'd treat her the same or at least include her but no idea what that adult relationship was like. I'd hope he stayed like a father to her but not sure.

Suzanne was not known to be dead though, she was missing. And he managed to go to IN I believe and get her declared dead, not in Colorado. Then he made some deal with Mallory and did to get that to happen I believe, I think they needed two signature or some such, can't recall, plus used Mallory for the assets but HE used them all. Moved sh*t around, sold the home, etc. all while acting like he missed his MISSING wife and while under suspicion from almost the start. It's just WRONG.

Yeah re Jackson, I'm sure he knows the money will come from somewhere. I did hear one person who thought he may well have offered his services pro bono. That's not entirely unbelievable either, it's major press and again, he will get the money somewhere. He77 even if he has to sue the last rehabi facility right...? He is so disgusting. Unethical. I get a bit sick already of hearing his praises sung.

 

[Tresir]

So true I thought but then I thought does no one insane ever look clean cut and I had to chuckle.

But yeah, I get your meaning totally. You make them look clean cut if you want a perfect, goodie two shoe, law abiding or whatever image. If you want an insane image you go for a Manson look or some such, not a Ted Bundy look.

Well the suicide vest they drew on him in that article did him no favours, that's for sure.

 

[Tresir]

There are I think four children if one includes the stepdaughter from Penny Marshall he legally adopted. She is mentioned as much but I'd hope he'd treat her the same or at least include her but no idea what that adult relationship was like. I'd hope he stayed like a father to her but not sure.

Suzanne was not known to be dead though, she was missing. And he managed to go to IN I believe and get her declared dead, not in Colorado. Then he made some deal with Mallory and did to get that to happen I believe, I think they needed two signature or some such, can't recall, plus used Mallory for the assets but HE used them all. Moved sh*t around, sold the home, etc. all while acting like he missed his MISSING wife and while under suspicion from almost the start. It's just WRONG.

Yeah re Jackson, I'm sure he knows the money will come from somewhere. I did hear one person who thought he may well have offered his services pro bono. That's not entirely unbelievable either, it's major press and again, he will get the money somewhere. He77 even if he has to sue the last rehabi facility right...? He is so disgusting. Unethical. I get a bit sick already of hearing his praises sung.

I didn't know that about Morphew getting Mallory onside. That may have been me suggesting the pro bono thing but then i heard the estate value. The stepdaughter is 61 years old, I read, so maybe she was already taken care of with a trust or something. If not, she may not get to see anything.

 

[Tresir]

Who would want this as a client?

Sunday 14 December.

View image in fullscreen
A courtroom sketch of Nick Reiner, wearing a blue protective vest, making his first court appearance on murder charges for the killing of his parents Rob and Michele Singer Reiner on 17 December. Photograph: Mona Edwards/Reuters

 

[GrandmaBear]

Well the suicide vest they drew on him in that article did him no favours, that's for sure.

Yeah I'd heard about it from an attendee before ever seeing it in the sketches. Entin I think. He said it wasn't the ones we were all used to seeing but longer and that it seemed he was wearing nothing underneath it. Yeah, it didn't do him any favors, seeing the sketches now. Looks like a dress.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I finished that movie they did. Charlie's Life or whatever it's called. It really makes me wonder how much is true and itis loosely based on true events, etc. is what I heard. That interview also helps and in putting the two together it really makes me wonder a LOT of things in relation to this case first of all but also I think touches on many subjects that would make for some good discussion based on what we've seen in life or people we have known dealing with similar issues or some things... The kid in the movie, just for one example, broke into the house or garage when the parents were home. They heard it and got a weapon themselves as they thought it might be an intruder. They found Charlie in the garage taking the wife's car and were relieved to see it was him but they did not interfere at all with him taking the car, probably out of fear?? Even though he was likely messed up they should have figured. He had bolted from rehab after doing SO well for some number of months.

I guess that's just ONE example but it makes me wonder DID he break into the house or could he enter at will...? In this killing? Had he EVER shown up out of the blue and broken in? There are ODs of friends in the movie, deaths. There was a girl he was very interested in and eventually did have a bit of a relationship with and she seemed to me to be doing better than he was at one point in rehab by far and she failed in the long run before he did. Most of the friends he'd known in rehab doing well also went back to drugs, etc. Just sad but a GOOD movie and some humor too.

He had a knack for standup comedy, never did a lot with it but was pretty good. The "guy" in the show. It wasn't maybe everybody's sense of humor but I found some of it humorous. You hear it twice throughout the show, the latter time is probably better than the first but both weren't bad. Is this based on Nick?

It is well WORTH the watch imo. Especially with trying to relate it to this family and this case. Dad did not want Charlie embarrassing him, mom was less like that... Dad was running for office and he almost based Charlie being in rehab long enough to get him through the election so he couldn't make news with some crime or incident to ruin his chances of winning. When Charlie was due to get out or wanted to leave and different things, dad worried more about his election I would say at times...

So you kind of wonder how true to life the characters are...

I think there may have been that bit in Rob despite the fact the parents were better to Nick than he probably ever was to them as an adult for sure but there had to be anger at times, embarrassment I'd think, fear and more. The movie touches on all those things and they of course wrote it...