Nick Reiner's 5 Best Defenses in Parents' Disturbing Murders

This is a devastating tragedy that has. befallen the Riner family. We all. recognize that. Uh our hearts go out to. the entire Reiner family. There are. very, very complex and serious issues. that are associated with this case. >> And it was that statement from Nick. Reiner's attorney, Alan Jackson, that. could be a preview of potentially. several different kinds of legal. defenses that could be mounted in this. case of the man accused of brutally. murdering his parents, Rob and Michelle. From mental health to the sufficiency of.

the evidence to mitigation to. potentially self-defense, we want to. examine what theoretical defenses could. come into play as we explore this. rapidly developing story. Welcome to. Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm. Jesse Weber. Now, here's the truth. I don't know if. we'd be able to put these episodes. together if it wasn't for the incredible. support that we get from our sponsors, and that includes Morgan and Morgan. This is America's largest personal. injury law firm. This is a firm with. over a,000 attorneys who have recovered.

$25 billion for more than 500,000. clients. Think about that. In the past. few months, a client in Florida received. $12 million when insurance offered just. $350,000. Out in Pennsylvania, another. client was awarded $26 million. That is. 40 times the insurers's offer. And. Morgan and Morgan, they make it easy to. fight for what you deserve. You can even. start a claim from your phone. So, if. you're injured, you can start a claim at. forthepeople.com/lcsidebar. You can click the link below or you can. scan the QR code on screen.

Now, as we know, 32-year-old Nick Reiner. has been formerly charged with two. counts of firstdegree murder in. connection with the apparent stabbing. deaths of his parents, renowned director. Rob Reiner and photographer and producer. Michelle Singer Reiner, who were found. dead in their Los Angeles home back on. December 14th. What we haven't discussed. yet are the potential defenses to be on. the lookout here because as we go. through this evidence, you do have to. wonder, is this a slam dunk case for the.

prosecution or not? That is what we want. to go through. And to understand. potential defenses, we have to go. through what we know right now. Like for. example, it has been reported that the. death certificates for this couple. indicate that they died just within. minutes of sustaining quote multiple. sharp force injuries inflicted with a. knife by another. That Rob was. apparently found at 3:45 p.m. Michelle. about a minute later. By the way, it was. reported that the couple's daughter Romy. was the one who found her father dead.

after the couple weren't responding to a. scheduled massage therapist appointment. Now, Nick was arrested hours later in. the Exposition Park area near USC, the. Santa Monica hotel room where Nick. apparently checked into at around 4:00. a.m. Sunday the 14th, apparently using. his own credit card, which is, by the. way, potentially quite incriminating. because he reportedly had been living in. the back house of the Riner's property. So, why check into this place at all. times? Well, it's been reported there. was blood in the shower and the mattress.

of that room. He's currently being held. at the Twin Towers correctional. facility. And this comes as there is. footage that has surfaced that's been. released of apparently Nick allegedly. walking alone at a gas station close to. the Reiner family home a little after. midnight on that Sunday. There's also. apparently footage of him allegedly in a. convenience store right before his. arrest as well. By the way, I will tell. you I think his apparent demeanor in. that footage, assuming it's him, could. be critical in a potential defense, which I'll talk about more in a minute. And this all comes as it was also.

reported Nick had attended a party at. Conan O'Brien's house the night before. the killings in which he allegedly went. around asking strange questions to. guests. Got into this apparent weird. interaction with actor Bill her then had. some sort of loud argument potentially. with his father at the party. His. parents left shortly after. A source. told People quote Nick was freaking. everyone out acting crazy. Kept asking. people if they were famous. I will say. family friends have reportedly said the. fight was overblown. But we also know. and we did a previous episode aside a.

full in-depth breakdown of the backstory. of Nick Reiner that this is a man with a. serious history of substance abuse. issues that he's been open about that. talked about his struggles since he was. 15 with heroin that he was homeless that. he was in and out of rehab. that he and. his father collaborated on a film known. as Being Charlie, which was released in. 2016. That's about a young man addicted. to drugs and his difficult combative. relationship with his former actor. father, who's cold and distant as he.

tries to recover. Rob, by the way, directed the film. So, with all of that. in mind, as Nick Reiner faces these. murder charges with special. circumstances, namely multiple murders, there's also a special allegation that. he personally used a dangerous and. deadly weapon, a knife. We're talking. now the death penalty on the table if. convicted or at least life in prison. without parole. Death penalty. questionable by the way because there's. been a moratorium on executions, but. serious consequences nonetheless. And. he's already made his first court. appearance and currently hasn't entered.

a plea. His arraignment is set for. January 7th. The question again is what. could be his potential defenses here? because it seems like alternative. suspects may be tricky, still in the. early stages. But what may. theoretically, what may possibly be. something that Alan Jackson explores. here? That's what I want to talk about. Okay, so let me bring on former federal. prosecutor Nema Romani to talk more. about this. Nema, thank you so much for. taking the time. All right, I got to. start with the big one here. A lot of. people have been talking about this.

insanity. Now, I mean, one of the prime. reasons that I think this is coming up, in my opinion, is because of what Nick. Reiner's defense attorney, Alan Jackson, told reporters after a court hearing. Take a listen. >> There are very, very complex and serious. issues that are associated with this. case. Those need to be thoroughly, but. very carefully. dealt with uh and examined and looked at. and analyzed. So to me, making a.

statement like that, right, complex, serious issues before a defense attorney. has the opportunity to see all the. evidence or know if there was like a. constitutional rights violation, it. seems to me he's talking about mental. illness, mental health could be wrong. Nemo, before we get into the specifics. of how insanity and how mental health. could play specifically into this case, just to put that to the side, just so. everybody knows, procedurally, how does. an insanity defense work out in LA?

Jesse, thanks for having me. And Alan. Jackson, of course, is one of the best, not just in the courtroom, but outside. the courtroom. So, there's certainly a. PR battle being waged here. But here in. California, when you're talking about. legal insanity, the trials are. bifurcated. So, first there's a guilt. phase that we typically see, you know, did the defendant do it or not? Is he. guilty or not guilty? If the defendant. is guilty, then we move to a second. phase where the burden shifts to the. defense. And it's based on a. prepoundonderance of the evidence. And.

here in California, we follow the. monotony test which says that because of. a mental disease or defect, the. defendant didn't understand the nature. and consequences of his actions. Basically, he didn't know right from. wrong. But the reason procedurally the. bifurcation is important is it's very. difficult for defendants and defense. attorneys to really pivot. You know, sometimes you'll see them try to argue. self-defense or it wasn't me. And then. when the jurors return a guilty verdict, they said, "No, no, no. It was me, but. the defendant was legally insane.".

>> So, it's hard, you know. >> Can I ask you about that? Can I ask you. about that? I mean, typically, how does. it work? Do they go and say, "Hey, listen, you know, he wasn't the one who. did this, or do they say do they. question the state's evidence, right? They they question whether or not the. state has proved beyond a reasonable. doubt all the elements and then say, "Okay, you know, we respect your. decision, but after all that, I know we. were casting doubt on him doing this. We're really going the insanity route.". Or do they just say, "Hey, listen. We're. not going to fight we're not going to.

fight uh the trial phase." Do they plead. they they can't just plead guilty and. then go into uh the insanity defense? Am. I wrong? I mean, I don't know how it. works. >> They can. And I think the better. practice is to accept responsibility and. move straight to the insanity defense. We've seen this sometimes with. defendants who are facing the death. penalty. Nicholas Cruz, for instance, right? We covered it here on Law and. Crime, you know, worst school shooting. in American history. He pleaded guilty. to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of. attempted murder. They went straight to.

the death penalty phase and they were. able to maintain some credibility and. ended up saving his life. But when you. defend it on both grounds, it ends up. being tougher. I do think you lose. credibility with the jury. Now, there. are some other ways that mental health. may come into this. I can't see Alan. Jackson walking into court and pleading. Nick Reiner guilty and moving straight. to insanity because insanity again is. very tough. It only works really a very. small percentage of the time, at least. here in California. >> Let's let's talk about that. So, you're. right. I if you look at the law it says.

because of that mental disease or defect. uh this person was incapable of knowing. or understanding the nature and quality. of their actions or was incapable of. knowing or understanding that that act. was morally or legally wrong. Now again. before we get into the specifics of Nick. Riner generally speaking how does a. defense uh prove that? I mean who do. they call? How do they prove it at the. time? You know these killings happen, right? How do you prove it at that time.

and what evidence is introduced and what. does the prosecution do to rebut it? >> So, obviously you rely on mental health. experts. It seems like Nick Riner was. under the care of a psychiatrist. He's. obviously been in and out of rehab, at. least what's been reported. From the. prosecution's perspective, obviously. they call their own witnesses, but you. just look at the facts of the case. Jesse, if you're capable enough to have. an argument with your parents and even. know it's your parents at Conan. O'Brien's Christmas party the night. before and you're capable enough to go. to a hotel in Santa Monica and wash off.

all the blood and close the curtains and. go to gas station and get a drink, that. doesn't strike me as legal insanity. It's really a high burden. We talk about. this person's crazy or insane. We throw. that out a lot, but to really not know. the nature and really consequences of. your actions, not knowing right from. wrong, you really have to think like. you're killing a demon or an alien or or. God or the dog is telling you to do. something, but you don't really know. that's wrong. It's very difficult to. prove. >> It's very difficult to prove, but let's. let's apply it to this case. So, there.

are reports from outlets like the Los. Angeles Times and KBC that Nick Reiner. was receiving medical treatment for. schizophrenia at the time of the deaths. of his parents. Okay, first of all, if. we're if that's introduced, is. schizophrenia the type of mental disease. or defect that could be necessary for. insanity? Let's start there. >> It could be. It's certainly one of the. ones that is most commonly argued in. these types of cases. So, that's. certainly, I'd say, a first good step.

for Nick Reiner, but it's not enough. It's necessary, but it's not sufficient. Going back to the old LSAT days. So just. being schizophrenic does not make you. legally insane if you know right from. wrong. >> But here's the thing, Nemo. Okay, if you. look at that footage, right, the. demeanor of him or allegedly him in that. footage walking by the gas station in. the convenience store, to me, it's. eerily calm. If this is, we don't know. the exact time of death, but if this is. somebody who just massacred their.

parents, you want to talk about a fact. pattern. Isn't a fact pattern somebody. commits a brutal murder and then just. sits there and waits and acts like. nothing nothing's happening? Now, I. don't know what he was thinking at that. point. It's hard to just judge from the. footage, but when I looked at that, I. said that could be something that Allen. Jackson may be working with if you're. talking about an insanity defense. Am I. totally uh wrong here? No, you will try to use it, but being a. stone cold killer doesn't make you. legally insane. We have seen these types. of murderers with that type of a effect.

Brian Coberger, right? I mean, he's. shown little to no emotion at any time. during the many years that he's been in. court and now he's going to serve the. rest of his life in Idaho State Prison. So, it does fit the profile of a killer. Again, if you know what you're doing, again, you're able to walk to a gas. station, you're able to pay for a drink. Now, that is not someone who's legally. insane in my opinion. >> What about getting a hotel room? I think. that you're probably right that uh See, I mean, he was apparently living with.

the parents. So, getting a hotel room at. all times. What do you think? >> Yeah. Get a hotel room at 4:00 a.m. in. Santa Monica where you wash off the. blood in the bathroom and it gets all. over the sheets, you clean up. Again, someone who's legally insane isn't. capable and coherent enough to clean the. blood off them. I get it. You know, there has to be some sort of defense, and I know Jackson will come up with. something, but the actions before and. after to me are not consistent with. someone who's legally insane.

>> There are two parts to this as well. So, I'm going to get to the other idea how. mental health may downgrade the charge. in a second. We'll get to that. just. focusing on insanity though the reports. of how he was acting at that party Conan. O'Brien's party the night before and. nothing has been officially confirmed by. law enforcement but if he gets into an. argument is asking weird questions of. guests is that help the insanity defense. or not you seem to suggest if he's. capable of getting into a coherent. argument that would suggest he's not.

insane right. >> I would because look you're asking. someone what their first name is what. their last name is are you famous right. you argue with your parents, you have to. leave. And again, we're going to have a. lot of famous celebrities here in LA who. are going to testify at this trial. I do. believe it's going to go to trial. Whether it's Bill her, whether it's. Conan O'Brien, other folks, they're. going to say, "Listen, here's someone. who's acting erratically, but someone. who, again, if you know it's your. parents and you know that this is a. famous person, that just doesn't strike.

me as someone in the state. Maybe this. is a former prosecutor in me and I'm. being skeptical and I just know how. rarely this works. I don't think it. will. Now, maybe they go in a very. different direction and they don't argue. insanity and they say that he was. drugged. You have an involuntary. intoxication defense. I think that's. something that is more likely to work. than legal insanity in my opinion. >> Just to be clear, any kind of insanity. defense or mental health defense would. be negated if he was voluntarily on.

drugs. So, whatever effect the drugs had. on him, he couldn't then argue he was. acting insane, right? It doesn't work. >> Yeah, we know voluntary intoxication is. not a legal defense. Involuntary maybe. And again, we know based on Karen Reed. that uh the defense may present a very. different alternate theory of the case. And one of them may be, listen, here's. someone who's been sober for a while, right? Reportedly has been off drugs. since September. He goes to a party, someone spikes his drink, and there you. go. Things spiral. Now, that now that.

would be creative, but it would actually. be a legal defense. And and just to be. clear before we move on to more mental. health ideas, if he took something and. the effects of it were completely. different than what was anticipated, if. there was laced with something, because. I've seen uh cases like this before, somebody might smoke marijuana, it's. laced with something, it has an effect. they weren't um anticipating and they. commit a crime. Can that downgrade a. charge? And we'll get into that a little. bit more, but can. >> No. Generally speaking, if you. voluntarily take drugs, you're.

responsible. So, if it's laced with like. PCP, for instance, that probably be the. most likely. >> um psychedelic that could cause someone. to do something like this, uh you're. responsible. But if you're taking a. legal drink, an alcoholic drink, and. something like that were to happen, then. you would have a defense. Got it. Okay. Before before we go through past. insanity, I I just have to ask you this. The reason this is a a defense that. people are talking about is because if. someone is declared insane, right, not. guilty by reason of insanity, what.

happens to them? They go to a. psychiatric facility, not prison. And. for how long? >> They're committed for the term of the. sentence until a determination is made. that they are now returned to sanity, in. which case they can be released to the. general population. >> Okay, so this is why it's a big deal. Now, putting insanity away, I think. there is a second related defense that's. come up that if you talk about mental. illness, that he won't be found not.

guilty of first-degree murder due to. insanity, but he could be found not. guilty of firstdegree murder, but rather. a lesser charge because of his state of. mind, because of his mental health. Can. you explain that? >> Yes. So, first-degree murder, of course, requires premeditation, you know, the. intent to kill. Now, voluntary drug use. and mental health can negate the. specific intent for a crime. So, it can. reduce firstdegree murder, the. premeditation, down to second degree.

Why is that a big deal? Now, District. Attorney Nathan Hawkman has talked about. the death penalty. That's not realistic. We haven't had an execution here in. almost 20 years. But, first-degree. murder with special circumstances does. carry a mandatory life without the. possibility of parole sentence. secondderee murder without special. circumstances. would potentially be as low as 15 to. life on each count, which would give him. the chance of parole at some point in. his career. Now, some more conservative.

attorneys may go that approach and say, "Listen, he did it, but talk about the. drug use, talk about the mental health, he lacked the specific intent for. premeditation, right? He just walked. into the bedroom, something happened, right? Can you explain that?" So if he. so put aside any kind of drug use for a. second because we don't know 100% if he. was on any substances at the time. If he. was uh just for argument sake if he was. schizophrenic and he was having an. episode. So it doesn't mean that he's. insane at the time. What's the argument? What's the fact pattern laid out by.

defense that would say he's not guilt he. didn't have the intent to kill but yet. killed his parents and was. schizophrenic. Like how does that how. would that again explain that to us a. little bit? >> Yeah. So I mean obviously the. prosecution is going to argue this was. premeditated. This is all related to. that argument at Conan O'Brien's house, right? >> They're there, they fight, they come. back to the home. Uh Reiner comes back. with a weapon, goes into the master. bedroom, and kills his mom and dad. Right? The defense will say, "No, that. episode passed. You know, he went into. the bedroom. It was a different.

unrelated argument. It was not. premeditated. He did not come with a. knife." The problem is when you get in. an argument and you come back with a. weapon under California law, that's. first-degree murder. That's. premeditation. That's what happened in. the Nipy Hustle case, right? Where they. argued manslaughter and second degree. But you could come back with a weapon. after any period of time. That is enough. for premeditation. So the defense will. try to separate that argument, separate. that episode from the night before. And. say, "Hey, something else happened. It. was really spur of the moment. Not.

enough for manslaughter, but certainly. enough for secondderee murder that will. give the defense and the defendant Nick. Rener a chance of parole at some point. in his life." Okay. So, this now goes. into another defense that I'm curious. will be explored and I don't know if. there is anything to substantiate this. in any way. I haven't seen anything that. would talking self-defense. Now, I would. imagine a self-defense argument would be. a complete not guilty or maybe a. conviction for manslaughter, right? You.

know, heat of passion. Is there an. argument that he was defending himself. from an imminent threat from his. parents? Acted in the heat of passion in. the moment, you know, there was for. voluntary manslaughter, there was. terror, there was anger. Um, I'm. assuming after this reported, let's say, altercation at the party, if that's. true, anything there, >> it's going to be tough. You know, you. got Rob Miner, he's 78, right? Michelle. Reiner, 70. You know, you got Nick who I.

believe is 32 at the time. It's a big. age difference, right, for you to. credibly argue self-defense. Now, when. it comes to self-defense, there's two. types here in California. There's. perfect self-defense. If you reasonably. believe you're at imminent risk of death. or serious bodily injury, you can use. deadly force, similar to the rule in. many states. We also have imperfect. self-defense, which says that if you. genuinely but unreasonably believe. you're imminent risk of death or serious. bodily injury, and you use deadly force, that reduces murder to manslaughter. Obviously, a big deal. if they are able.

to prove that. So, that's one of those. ways that maybe the mental health can. come in. It's going to be tough though. to argue self-defense against your. parents, especially if they don't have. any type of weapon. >> And I would also imagine what would. complicate that argument is they were. apparently found in their bedroom late. at night, multiple wounds, a knife. Those are all complicating factors for. the defense, right? >> Oh, no question. You know, and there's. different reports. We know that at least. from medical reports, we have multiple. stab wounds. There were some reports. unconfirmed that their throats were.

slashed. Obviously, that would be bad. for self-defense if that were true. Being in a master bedroom again makes it. less likely that you're going to be. defending yourself against someone in. their master bedroom is does seem to be. at least circumstantial evidence of. premeditation that you went in to attack. them. >> and he would have to testify about that. Nick Riner, I'd imagine. >> usually Yeah, Jesse, the conventional. wisdom is in a self-defense case, the. defendant has to take the stand. So. obviously that would subject him to a. grueling and rigorous cross-examination. >> Um I want to backtrack on one thing.

before I go to another defense. This is. also sort of a defense. Um could a. history of mental disease or a history. of addiction, can that be used as. mitigation for sentencing to lessen the. sentence in some way? >> It absolutely can. You know, the issue. is obviously if you get hit with that. firstdegree special circumstances, the. judge has no discretion to go anything. less than life without the possibility. of parole. But absolutely all that. evidence can come in to sentencing if.

there's an indeterminate sentence and a. judge can sentence within a range that. comes in all the time in any type of. criminal case. >> And of course, maybe a way to get the. death penalty off the table, maybe even. in front of a jury if they hear that. And this is another defense that I. wanted to get into where the defense. legitimately attacks the aspects of the. prosecution's evidence. You know, there. I we're seeing this in the Manion case. where I think the evidence is, you know, quite strong that he committed the. crime. But can they get evidence thrown. out on the basis of a tainted.

investigation that a defendant's rights. were violated in some way? You know, one. of the key ways defense attorneys can. dismantle a prosecution's case is to get. the evidence tossed out. And when. thinking about that, when thinking about. the evidence, I just before we go into. it, I just want to go back to what Los. Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hawkman. said at an earlier presser. >> At the appropriate time, the actual. evidence involved in this case will be. presented in a court of law. So, I ask. for your patience until that is done. But again, please do not rely on rank.

speculation, rumor, or hearsay to. believe that you understand anything. about what went on in this case. So. Nema, again, they haven't revealed what. the evidence is, the forensics, the. digital evidence. We get samplings of. it, but talk to me about the ways that. Allan Jackson and Nick Reiner's defense. team, what they could do here. And. again, it's difficult because. authorities haven't revealed a lot of. the evidence yet, but what are ways they. could get evidence tossed out or. question the evidence? We've seen Manion.

in many cases where the defense will. file suppression motions say that. evidence was unlawfully seized often in. violation of the fourth and fifth. amendments of the constitution really to. go on the offense. Now we saw in again. the Karen Reed case where they really. put Massachusetts law enforcement on. trial. They really destroyed the lead. detective Michael Proctor in that case. So good defense lawyers what they do is. they point to sloppy investigation rush. to judgement. These are themes in many.

defense cases. They try to get evidence. suppressed. They'll say that evidence. was planted. Again, I don't know how. careful Nick Reiner was. I imagine that. a house in Brentwood has surveillance. video and he didn't seem to be be. particularly careful in terms of his. cell phone and where he went after the. murder. But it's certainly possible that. they can get some evidence tossed and. suppressed and put LAPD on trial. They. certainly don't have the best track. record, and I say it respectfully as. someone who lives and works in Los. Angeles. they have botched some big.

cases. So given Allan Jackson's sort of. track record of going after law. enforcement and LAPD's, it's possible. But again, I think it's very unlikely. This strikes me as a very strong case. and one that's going to be difficult for. Jackson and the defense. >> because they seem very confident that he. did this for whatever reason. I don't. know if it was the hotel room that was. allegedly stained with blood, the. surveillance footage. They haven't. indicated, at least as far as I know, where the murder weapon is or or the. circumstances of that. But you would say.

that they feel fairly confident in the. evidence they have against him at this. point and the sufficiency of the. evidence and the way it was collected. >> I do. You know, in these murder cases, you typically see three defenses, right? It wasn't me. I mean, it seems like the. evidence is going to be strong. Again, usually in a multiple murder stabs crime. scene, there's going to be a lot of. blood and other DNA evidence. I expect. to see that in this case. The other is. self-defense. We talked about it. The. third is, you know, I didn't mean to do. it, right? It was an accident. It was. manslaughter. It was something less. So,

I think they're probably going to have. to go in that third direction, try to. attack the intent somehow. To say it. wasn't him and it was someone else that. did this, I think, is going to be a. tough legal and factual hill to climb, but we'll see. Maybe they'll pull a. rabbit out of their head. >> Yeah, I haven't seen anything indicating. alternative suspects, but we're still. early in this case. And if that should. develop, maybe we'll do another sidebar. on that one as well. Uh Nema, thank you. so much uh for taking the time and. breaking it down with us. Really, really. appreciate it. Uh and healthy happy new. year if I don't see you before.

>> Thanks, Jesse. Happy New Year to you, too. I'm sure we're going to be talking. about this one for quite some time. >> And that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should. get your podcast. You can follow me on X. or Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll. speak to you next time. [Music].