The Murder of Nina Reiser (Crime Documentary)
The couple met first in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Nina was last seen alive on September 3, 2006. The key witnesses were a forensic technician, police, and a traffic officer. A sample of blood matching Nina Reiser’s DNA was found on a bag in Hans Reiser’s car and on a pillar in his mother’s home. In addition, a 40-piece socket set, a receipt for the purchase of the socket set, four-seat belts, and a ratchet wrench with a socket on it were some key material evidences in the case.
Nina’s Honda car would be processed by involving the police in areas it had been spotted along SR 13 Warren Freeway, while Han’s vehicle could be tracked using the police surveillance in all directions along Acton Street. The mobile phone would be processed by tracking the lasts communications in the cell phone for further investigation. On Monday, July 7, 2008, Han took the investigators to the shallow grave where he had buried Nina.
The body harm and destruction indicated the degree of murder, and Han will be sentenced next on March 2023. In his court defense, Sean tried to evade being associated with Nina’s murder. Rory was important in the murder witness case since he was with the mother when she disappeared and could give testimony of occurrences. Having children testifying might hinder fair judgment since they might be easily influenced. A child should start testifying from 12 years old.
Sean was important in this case because of his closeness to Hans and his past murder cases. Having Sean testify before the court, there would be proof of more evidence which would assist the court since he might have assisted Han in committing the crime (Lee Henry, 2018). The defense attorney might have wanted to avail more evidence on how the murder has taken place by bringing Sean to the courtroom. Nina moved to Russia because she was escaping from the constant threats and intimidations from her husband, who had not known his children for quite long.
Treatment Of Murdered Body
In the eventuality of an individual mysteriously lost, the relatives, fellow employees, or any other relevant person can file the report. Once the case has been reported to the police, they should act immediately to search for the missing person. Han could have been curious to trace his children and pick them without his wife’s knowledge. The physical evidence was important since it proved the magnitude of the crime committed. It is possible since a person can easily differentiate a recent occurrence from a crime committed over a long period.
Nina has indeed been injured or killed in her mother’s house, and later her body was ferried to a dumpsite. Han was guilty and could try removing the necessary evidence to assist the police in their investigation. Besides, Han could have hired people or recruited murderers to follow his wife before paying them. It is rarely common to prosecute a person for murder when there is no body since it gives enough evidence on the degree of murder. Therefore, it would be hard for a defense attorney to prove his case when there was no body available. Han did not want to prove that he was guilty of an offense and requested an alternative verdict which is not harsh as the second-degree murder verdict.
At the court, Hora made opinions based on Han’s erratic behavior to show that he was guilty of an offense. The defense lawyer was considerate and non-judgmental to allow for the possibility of occurrence. Based on my opinion, I would have found Han guilty since his constant disturbances, and unusual presentations during the case proved that he was guilty of the murder. The decision to sentence Han was appropriate since it assisted in providing critical evidence. Finally, I would not let Han out of the parole since he has not proved a change of suicidal behavior.
Reference
Lee Henry, K. (2018). Hans Reiser Case: November 19, 2008. SFGate. Web.