Gang,

Love this board - got help and was able to help folks. You guys are great! Hopefully you can help me with this one. PLEASE bear with me as I suck - I dont know names, or location - so doing my best.

This is probably the newer / old ones - not from the 80's. It was Robert Stack and the ones from the 90's - when they first updated the intro music a little, etc.

OK so there is a husband, wife, one child I beleive, and nosy in-laws (the Husband's parents). And I *think* the wife / their daughter in law was murdered. I'm pretty sure it was the wife was dead, and the husband was cleared as he was at work.

If it helps, here is a few scenes I remember - The detective- young-ish, overweight, was talking and trying to find out who would want this woman dead, and several friends were like (I think one was a hairdresser) says "Have you looked at the grandparents (in-laws)?" And the detective says "I was taken it back, because I didnt expect that"

So he does a little digging, and he learns that the wife and her in laws were bickering back and forth about raising her son; like there is a scene where they are nagging, "hey his bottle is empty" and BS, and the husband was trying to calm the two, but it was clear they did not get along. SO they surmise that the in-laws and the wife finally got into a huge argument when the husband was gone and she was accidentally killed. I think then the in-laws took off. Before disappearing, the in-laws claim they came to see their grandson, but no one was home, so they left. Detective thinks they are lying and a fight got outta hand.

I hope this helps. If anyone has a clue as to this episode, Im trying to find it. Thanks in advance.

The name of the woman killed was Kristi Gunderson Lee.

Dang, you are good!!

Thanks so much!! How the heck did you remember that?

I appreciate it alot!

Yeah, I don't think the grandparents killed Kristi at all. I mean, if I had a nickel for everytime a wife hated her mother in law....................you know what I mean, even what the friend described about how Kristi talked about her in-laws was very common to how a LOT of women would describe their mother in law. The Everybody Loves Raymond scenario is very common but its hardly something that can lead to murder.

I don't think Jeff did it either. He was at work, he's cleared. But even for his parents to do it would be foolish. They were there to pick up their grandson and then they came back to find the body. If that doesn't implicate yourself then I don't know what does. The 911 call, if it were authentic, sounded pretty genuine to me from the mother in law.

It is strange how they didn't take a polygraph though. But it isn't the end of the world. Paul Pollis never took one and the more I think about that case the more I think he's innocent. Larry Gibson took one and passed and almost everyone thinks he is guilty. David Dowaliby took one and failed, as did Tim McClure. People are torn on their guilt. So there are times when taking the polygraph can backfire on you as well even if you are innocent.

Plus, they have their grandson with them. Kids don't lie. He looked old enough in the picture where he would have spilled the beans on SOMETHING I would think. I just personally think that Jeff's past life came back to haunt him. He even said that when the cops showed up at work he thought immediately they were going to arrest him. That might give you reason to think that he still knew some shady people, or that these shady people were still pestering him for moving on. You know, being involved in drugs and with sketchy people is a lot like being in the mob, its tough to get out and they don't like it when you do get out. I am sure with Jeff's new found clean life he rubbed some of his old colleagues the wrong way. Who better to target than his wife?

This is what I think happened.

As a retired investigator myself, I look at motive and overall behavior. Sure polygraph is a neat tool, but can be flawed.

His past could have killed her, but they usually kill YOU; making a statement. Only in the movies do they do the proverbial "Im going to kidnap / kill someone you love if you don't pay". To maintain their power, they make you pay or kill you - then move on. Plus it had been so long, most likely they would have acted sooner rather than later. And there was no mob, he was an addict with small time wanna be thugs in another state.

The murder itself - long struggle and strangulation? If a burglar, they usually just run away. Rare would a stranger perform an "up close" killing such as strangulation or stabbing. Usually its a quick shot, muffled (small guns usually unheard) or blunt object and run away. But, it certainly is possible it was some burglar - nor do I know if there were any predators in the area at that time. If that was the case, tho, it is odd no sexual assault. With that type of murder, it is usually some acquaintenace of some sort, or someone who enjoys killing. Most don't - hence the use of something quick like a gun.

The parents had to implicate themselves - it was known they were sched to be with their grandson. I'm betting it wasnt planned - argument ensued, already a history of becomming physical with each other. I agree in-laws not getting along is common, but physical altercations certainly are not. The 911 call sounded both ways to me - I can see innocent, or "OMG, I cant beleive what we've done!" But the police didnt mentioned any marks on the grandparents. I dont know how old this is, but hand marks on the neck? Not sure if there was any evidence that could be obtained.

I am open to any scenario, but would need to know more - such as similar crimes, crimes in that area.

I can't seem to find any other threads on this case. Not a popular topic or am I just missing the threads?

As a retired investigator myself, I look at motive and overall behavior. Sure polygraph is a neat tool, but can be flawed.

His past could have killed her, but they usually kill YOU; making a statement. Only in the movies do they do the proverbial "Im going to kidnap / kill someone you love if you don't pay". To maintain their power, they make you pay or kill you - then move on. Plus it had been so long, most likely they would have acted sooner rather than later. And there was no mob, he was an addict with small time wanna be thugs in another state.

The murder itself - long struggle and strangulation? If a burglar, they usually just run away. Rare would a stranger perform an "up close" killing such as strangulation or stabbing. Usually its a quick shot, muffled (small guns usually unheard) or blunt object and run away. But, it certainly is possible it was some burglar - nor do I know if there were any predators in the area at that time. If that was the case, tho, it is odd no sexual assault. With that type of murder, it is usually some acquaintenace of some sort, or someone who enjoys killing. Most don't - hence the use of something quick like a gun.

The parents had to implicate themselves - it was known they were sched to be with their grandson. I'm betting it wasnt planned - argument ensued, already a history of becomming physical with each other. I agree in-laws not getting along is common, but physical altercations certainly are not. The 911 call sounded both ways to me - I can see innocent, or "OMG, I cant beleive what we've done!" But the police didnt mentioned any marks on the grandparents. I dont know how old this is, but hand marks on the neck? Not sure if there was any evidence that could be obtained.

I am open to any scenario, but would need to know more - such as similar crimes, crimes in that area.

Granted we didn't actually SEE the grandparents in an interview but rather just the re-enactment. If the re-enactment is any indication they were older and not very big. But either way, would a young woman who looked to be in relatively good shape lose in a fight to a woman probably 30 years her senior? And if so, would it come to death blows? I just think its far fetched. If the grandparents did it they would have waited a long time before bringing the child back, not just an hour. Basically they could have practically cleared themselves had they done it but stayed out with the kid much longer. If you return one hour later that is a very small window for something to happen. If you return 4-5 hours later, lets just say a LOT can happen in that time frame and the chances of you looking guilty decrease. So if they did it, you would think they would have been out longer and done things smarter like intentionally showing up at a restaurant to prove they had an alibi. Or at a park, or whatever.

This is what makes me think they are innocent and just happened to show up at the wrong time. Plus, no signs of a struggle on them, no cuts, no bruises. And the key for me still is the little boy. A kid will rat you out whether you want them to or not. He didn't.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?p=4597836

I believe this would be considered the "main discussion" for this case. I think this one has got to be top 5 most underrated/overlooked UM cases ever. I personally think someone broke into the house looking for drugs (Kristi's husband was a known user), Kristi surprised them and the intruder killed her and hightailed it out of there right before the in-laws returned.