A Twist in the Rob & Michele Reiner Homicide Case
Criminal law is not typically part of a domestic relations blog. But, the likelihood you will be assaulted by someone you know is roughly twice that of an attack by a stranger and, for women in particular, husbands and boyfriends are “high risk.”
Recall last December when we learned that comedic actor Rob Reiner and his wife had been stabbed to death in their home. Later that day, their son Nick was arrested and charged with the killings. Those charges remain pending.
News reports are that Nick had mental disorders and that he had an altercation with his father at the home of Conan O’Brien a day before. The numbers are always speculative but the senior Reiners were estimated to be worth $200 million. The estate plan would have included four children and Nick’s share was to be distributed through a trust.
This week Nick asked the courts to grant him access to $1.5 million of his estate share so that he can defend the murder charges. He has pled not guilty and his petition to the probate court is reputed to say: “Nick loved his parents, and he is devastated by their deaths. But the facts about what did and did not happen to them are not at issue in this Trust litigation, Like anyone accused of a crime, Nick is presumed innocent, and he is entitled to mount his defense with the resources that are lawfully his own.”
Most states, including Pennsylvania have something called a “Slayer’s Act.” It is deceptively simple saying: “ Slayer not to acquire property as result of slaying. No slayer shall in any way acquire any property or receive any benefit as the result of the death of the decedent, but such property shall pass as provided in the sections following. 20 Pa. C.S. 8802. A “slayer” is defined as someone who participates in an unlawful killing.
The facts, aside from the history of mental illness and the incident the night before are not fully published. The betting seems to be that Nick Reiner will plead not guilty by reason of insanity or guilty but mentally ill or he will not contest the charges without admitting guilt. But today he has pled not guilty and, as his petition says, he may be held without bail, but he remains presumptively innocent. He is entitled to a public defender but his parents provided for him to have best of everything-including a lawyer of his choice. Chances are good that a probate court will order funds to be made available to defend these charges. A million five sounds a bit on the high side even when its two counts of murder, but we shall see.
The other back story involving the Reiner family reminded me of how siblings approach these tragedies. In 1983 a 37 year old man living outside Philadelphia shot and killed his parents in their apartment building. The son related that his parents had interfered with his social security disability and he had heard on television that he should kill them. My involvement came when the defendant’s siblings came forward and asked my then law partner to help them find an attorney to defend their brother. Their request came with a twist. They would finance the defense, but their goal was to avoid seeing their brother convicted of murder and possibly executed. They wanted a plea that would produce confinement to a state mental hospital.
This was a complex capital case. We referred it to a lawyer well regarded for such matters. But then he called me and said: “I can’t agree to the terms of the siblings. Their brother is my client and while a plea involving diminished capacity is far and away the most likely result, if my client (the defendant charged) wants to go to trial that’s my ethical obligation. The fact that someone else is paying does not allow me to yield to their wants even though I understand they have suffered enough death in losing their parents.”
The news reports in the Reiner case suggests a similar set of events. It seems that Nick’s siblings were headed in the direction of underwriting his legal fees. But those discussions had “broken down” and they had withdrawn their proposal Nick Reiner’s former attorney, Alan Jackson, finally comes clean about why he suddenly quit murder case. One can infer they faced the same dilemma I saw in 1984. They want Nick in a mental institution, not on death row. But, while that may be the result the other Reiner children want, Nick Reiner is not just presumed innocent but in control of his legal defense.
A Twist on this twist: While reading the Slayer’s Act statute, I note it was amended effective in 2025 to state that anyone convicted of “elder abuse” was also ineligible to acquire any property or benefit from their victim. 20 Pa.C.S. 8802.1