CA - Murder victims Identified as Rob Reiner and wife Michele - LA Dec 14 2025

  • #2,141
"Jackson said
the circumstances under which he had to withdraw from the case were beyond Nick's control.

TMZ broke the story ...
Nick was diagnosed with schizo-affective disorder
and there are issues regarding his meds
that could lead to a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity."

1767817514422.webp


 
  • #2,142
I suspect that avenue was blocked as well. By NR.
So maybe NR won't cooperate with a not guilty plea? So Jackson is angry with NR. Jackson is clearly mad at someone who is saying NR is guilty.
 
  • #2,143
That short statement by the family was perfectly opaque. Is it possibly that it was someone else paying the lawyer?
So it wasn't NR. Do we know for sure the family had stepped up to hire the atty? ( & not Billy Crystal, etc?)

This was the report of ‘the family’ paying the bill, however the source is an unnamed ‘longtime family friend’ and it’s questionable why they’d feel compelled to disclose private details to the media.


“According to a longtime family friend, the money funding Nick’s elite defense is coming directly from Rob and Michele Reiner’s estate.

The insider, who had close ties to Rob’s father, actor and filmmaker Carl Reiner, said grieving relatives made the decision to retain Jackson themselves.

The motivation, the source claims, goes beyond legal strategy. Family members allegedly believe that psychiatric confinement would be preferable to a lifetime behind bars.

They would rather see Nick placed indefinitely in a mental institution than incarcerated in prison.”
 
  • #2,144
Jackson said
the circumstances under which he had to withdraw from the case were beyond Nick's control.


This isn't what I truly believe, but just kicking around the football here—-if the circumstances were beyond Nick’s control, maybe there is a possibility that it had more to do with Jackson personally than with the case.

Maybe AJ was diagnosed with something, or someone in his family, that would render it difficult for Jackson to continue with such a lengthy and complicated case.

Or maybe Nick threatened Jackson in some way, but it’s “beyond Nick’s control” because Nick is mentally ill?

But nah, I don’t really think these could be true. Just trying to think everything through.

Just my speculation.
 
  • #2,145
This was the report of ‘the family’ paying the bill, however the source is an unnamed ‘longtime family friend’ and it’s questionable why they’d feel compelled to disclose private details to the media.


“According to a longtime family friend, the money funding Nick’s elite defense is coming directly from Rob and Michele Reiner’s estate.

The insider, who had close ties to Rob’s father, actor and filmmaker Carl Reiner, said grieving relatives made the decision to retain Jackson themselves.

The motivation, the source claims, goes beyond legal strategy. Family members allegedly believe that psychiatric confinement would be preferable to a lifetime behind bars.

They would rather see Nick placed indefinitely in a mental institution than incarcerated in prison.”
Thanks, MistyWaters. I spoke too soon, I just noticed the same in the NYT.
 
  • #2,146
AJ believes that NR is mentally ill. Unable to make good, wise decisions. So, he's not responsible for his decisions even now. Whatever happened to remove him from the case, will never be Nick's fault -- even if Nick fired him. That's my thoughts
 
  • #2,147
This was the report of ‘the family’ paying the bill, however the source is an unnamed ‘longtime family friend’ and it’s questionable why they’d feel compelled to disclose private details to the media.


“According to a longtime family friend, the money funding Nick’s elite defense is coming directly from Rob and Michele Reiner’s estate.

The insider, who had close ties to Rob’s father, actor and filmmaker Carl Reiner, said grieving relatives made the decision to retain Jackson themselves.

The motivation, the source claims, goes beyond legal strategy. Family members allegedly believe that psychiatric confinement would be preferable to a lifetime behind bars.

They would rather see Nick placed indefinitely in a mental institution than incarcerated in prison.”
According to a longtime family friend, the money funding Nick’s elite defense is coming directly from Rob and Michele Reiner’s estate.

The insider, who had close ties to Rob’s father, actor and filmmaker Carl Reiner, said grieving relatives made the decision to retain Jackson themselves.

THE ABOVE TWO SENTENCES CONTRADICT ONE ANOTHER. Either the estate was paying somehow despite the laws in place to prevent just such enrichment of murderers in California as suggested in the first or surviving family members were paying as suggested in the second sentence (which I believe was the case)

regardless moving forward, the tax payers of California will be responsible for footing the bill.
 
  • #2,148
Question: If AJ passionately believes that NR is not guilty of murder, could he defend him pro bono? Is that allowed if you began as a paid private attorney?
 
  • #2,149
It's doubtful the attorney will ever reveal why he has stepped down.
(lawyer/client privilege ?)
Whether squeaky clean in his motives or not, the attorney Alan Jackson may not want to represent Nick because imo, A.J. has represented other high profile celebs and regardless if people agreed with Rob Reiner, he was held in high regard, and it could reflect quite poorly on A.J. if he continued in his defense of Nick ?

I get why he said (paraphrased), "...Nick is innocent...Print that..."; as everyone is innocent until proven guilty -- but just hearing that was grating to the ears.
As if A.J. was wanting to say something similar to, "Mark my Words".
Hmm.
Wonder what he thinks privately ?
Jmo.
 
  • #2,150
There is no evidence that this is the case. He has said repeatedly (in interviews and on Dopey) that he and Rob never really 'fought' in terms of outbursts or anything like that. They had a strenuous relationship but it wasn't a violatile one. At least it wasn't when he was still in his early 20s.
I think there is evidence that he was physically threatening. What does it mean when someone says a teenager had a 20 minute tantrum? What does it mean when a father has to give a 'bear hug' to a child to try and alter their angry tantrum? Typically an out of control tantrum includes crying, screaming, flailing, throwing things, and/or hitting.
We have heard examples of Nick throwing chairs and throwing cups across the room. And examples of him destroying everything in his guest house, then laughing about it.
So to try and say that his outbursts were not volatile is incorrect, imo.
Then they should have cut him off completely. Let him figure it out himself and if he ever gets his head together, then help him.

That^^^ is very easy to say.>>>> " just cut him off completely and let him figure it out."

First of all, you cannot legally cut off your minor child completely. You are responsible for their home, food and care. So they could not cut him off. They had to deal with the volatile tantrums and the defiance on a daily basis.
Instead they took a half-assed approach. Send him to clinics on the far side of the country so you don't have to deal with his issue but at the same time keep indulging him. "Ok, you ran away from this one, now we'll send you to another" type of deal.
It is not half assed to send a child away to a program that promises to address their defiance and their sobriety. It is a full measure of hope and dedication. Half assed would be to keep trying out patient therapy, which allows the child to keep getting high and being defiant.
As I said, I think sending him to these therapies instead of dealing with him under close supervision, especially during those developmental years, was the wrong choice (imo) but if you're gonna do that, then go full in.
You say that so easily---" deal with him under close supervision during those developmental years"

How exactly? Have you ever tried to 'deal' with an unruly spoiled rich kid high on cocaine before ? They don't 'deal.' To deal means people negotiate and barter. Rich kids who just want to continue getting high don't comply and make concessions.

"Close supervision?' You cannot 'supervise' a grown child that refuses to accept any rules or requests. When their response is a 20 minute tantrum of screaming and throwing things and breaking things and flailing at you if you get close, it becomes a standoff. It's like a hostage situation where the rest of the family is held hostage.

You can't do it middle of the road type of thing. As far as the school part goes, did he actually refuse to go to school or they simply thought that they can just buy a diploma because they're rich? School was of no consequence to them. They could find him a high paying job any time he wanted to.
He refused to go. End of Story according to him. Not going to go and you can't make me. And if you do drag me there I will just act out and get sent home.
Only Nick knows but I find no reason not to believe him. He shared pretty embarrassing stories about himself on same podcast and I never felt that he was lying or omitting the truth at any point. He came off as pretty forthcoming in the interview and never seemed like he was making these stories up
He fooled you too then. You are taking him at his word when everyone knows that he is a master manipulator and talented liar..You say you have no reason not to believe him? He was a known liar and manipulator. Why take him at his word?

His whole sad complaint that all he wanted was love and attention from mummy and daddy is a master manipulation. He always had their full attention. Always.
There's no evidence of that. There's some stories, whether true or not, in which he was acting like a petulant kid, sure. But if that is your benchmark of aggressive probably half of the kids going through adolescence meet that criteria
I think you are grossly underestimating the amount of chaos and grief that he created within his household for all of those years. I guess unless you have lived it you would not understand. If you truly think that half of all adolescents meet his benchmark of aggression there you are way off, in my opinion.

They have now said that he was diagnosed as schizophrenic in his early years. I doubt that half of all adolescents meet that benchmark. He was truly a special case, imo.
Were they failing? If you believe his story, they never really tried.
YES, if you believe his story 'they never really tried.' But if you believe friends and family members, they tried and tried so much, that it interfered with the rest of their daily lives. It consumed them. It was all they worried about and dealt with most of the time. Just as he hoped.
They just sent him to rehab after that incident with his friend. From then on it was rehab after rehab.
It was rehab after rehab why???? Oh, because he kept getting high and kept refusing to follow the family rules of going to school and behaving at home.
They tried to solve his problems with money, not with attention and care he should have gotten. Obviously we don't have a full picture of their family dynamics, but 18 rehab stints by the time you're 19 seems extremely excessive.
ATTENTION? I don't understand this accusation that they didn't pay attention to him. That couldn't be further from the truth. And Nick made sure of that. They had to pay their full attention to him because he kept everyone on edge. He created chaos and uncertainty so they had to have full attention on him 24/7.

I lived this experience when I was growing up with a schizophrenic younger brother. My parents went though similar dynamics and it is exhausting and depressing and nerve wracking for everyone involved.

I don't understand all the criticism towards the parents who were doing the best they knew how to do. When a totally defiant, non compliant child puts all their energy into disruptive chaos, there is little anyone can do.


 
Last edited:
  • #2,151
Question: If AJ passionately believes that NR is not guilty of murder, could he defend him pro bono? Is that allowed if you began as a paid private attorney?
Good question.
Idk.
If paid pro bono (aka funded by the California taxpayers, correct ?) , would A. Jackson be able to set his own fee ?
Could he ask for more than what he would've been paid from the Reiner's estate.
Maybe that's Jacksons' plan ?

Although N.R. could throw a wrench into that plan by deciding to represent himself.
That last bit is just kidding, although some criminals have done exactly that.
It'd be something if N.R. represented himself, lost, and ended up on death row or prison for life.
I think he needs locking away for good and in prison.
He can still get treatment behind bars.
At the very least confined someplace for the remainder of his days, I don't think he can be trusted to be free in society ever again.

Also think that N.R. might be cunning even though ill.
My fears about a mental health facility (or medium-to-low security facility) are that he could be released after they deem him treated and cured.
What if he can pull it all together enough and be released, but then go on to harm others ?
Omo.
 
Last edited:
  • #2,152
It's doubtful the attorney will ever reveal why he has stepped down.
(lawyer/client privilege ?)
Whether squeaky clean in his motives or not, the attorney Alan Jackson may not want to represent Nick because imo, A.J. has represented other high profile celebs and regardless if people agreed with Rob Reiner, he was held in high regard, and it could reflect quite poorly on A.J. if he continued in his defense of Nick ?

I get why he said (paraphrased), "...Nick is innocent...Print that..."; as everyone is innocent until proven guilty -- but just hearing that was grating to the ears.
As if A.J. was wanting to say something similar to, "Mark my Words".
Hmm.
Wonder what he thinks privately ?
Jmo.
I def believe AJ believes exactly what he said. It sssssseeeems like someone took some control over how they wanted it to go for NR, it may of even been NR himself, not responsible for his own thoughts in this and that makes sense, for all we know, NR said he does not want defending and AJ would of def talked in detail with him at length about this decision and had to 'leave it' and step away. It seems that way to me at this point. IMO
 
  • #2,153
I don't know what "parental mistakes" the Reiners may have made, other than some here who say they would have done things differently than the Reiners and think that NR would have turned out differently. All that is just a matter of opinion.

I was just asking what the basis of those opinions are within WS TOS.

Preemptively regarding criticisms of repeated self-funded residential programs for NR from an early age:
I submit the consideration of the benefits of respite from NR’s strong personality the extent of which we see realized brutally and without regret would be for an otherwise high functioning family.

It was isolating for NR I’m sure but the other children must be thought of too, no?

I see no evidence they abandoned him to the streets for the rest of us and public services to have to deal with his murderous self. I appreciate that.

Agonizing choice to have residential treatment though the R’s had the luxury of knowing NR was well attended to with programing, nutrition, and supervision unlike around here where everyone is too poor to self-pay and there are no facilities except a miserable juvenile system and for adults a stint in the pit of the county jail is the best hope for maybe getting them some treatment in drug or mental health court to bring them to their senses.



All imo
 
  • #2,154
Good question.
Idk.
If paid pro bono (aka funded by the California taxpayers, correct ?) , would A. Jackson be able to set his own fee ?
Could he ask for more than what he would've been paid from the Reiner's estate.
Maybe that's Jacksons' plan ?

Although N.R. could throw a wrench into that plan by deciding to represent himself.
That last bit is just kidding, although some criminals have done exactly that.
It'd be something if N.R. represented himself, lost, and ended up on death row or prison for life.
I think he needs locking away for good and in prison.
He can still get treatment behind bars.
At the very least confined someplace for the remainder of his days, I don't think he can be trusted to be free in society ever again.

Also think that N.R. might be cunning even though ill.
My fears about a mental health facility (or medium-to-low security facility) are that he could be released after they deem him treated and cured.
What if he can pull it all together enough and be released, but then go on to harm others ?
Omo.
Doesn't pro bono mean that Jackson foregoes a fee? Ie his firm, or he, provides it free to NR. The taxpayers would not be involved.
 
  • #2,155
He did seem angry and maybe like you said, he just found out he wouldn’t be paid and no longer working on the case.
I think the siblings may have spoken with him and he described to them the defense case. It might have included AJ having to criticise the parents and their treatment of him as a teenager etc. He was mistreated by being sent away and rejected, etc?

Maybe the siblings decided not to fund the defense anymore?
 
  • #2,156
He has a lot of grievances against his parents. Now he will have plenty of opportunity to experience what it is really like without parents to provide emotional, financial and other types of support.
 
  • #2,157
I think there is evidence that he was physically threatening. What does it mean when someone says a teenager had a 20 minute tantrum? What does it mean when a father has to give a 'bear hug' to a child to try and alter their angry tantrum? Typically an out of control tantrum includes crying, screaming, flailing, throwing things, and/or hitting.
We have heard examples of Nick throwing chairs and throwing cups across the room. And examples of him destroying everything in his guest house, then laughing about it.
So to try and say that his outbursts were not volatile is incorrect, imo.


That^^^ is very easy to say.>>>> " just cut him off completely and let him figure it out."

First of all, you cannot legally cut off your minor child completely. You are responsible for their home, food and care. So they could not cut him off. They had to deal with the volatile tantrums and the defiance on a daily basis.

It is not half assed to send a child away to a program that promises to address their defiance and their sobriety. It is a full measure of hope and dedication. Half assed would be to keep trying out patient therapy, which allows the child to keep getting high and being defiant.

You say that so easily---" deal with him under close supervision during those developmental years"

How exactly? Have you ever tried to 'deal' with an unruly spoiled rich kid high on cocaine before ? They don't 'deal.' To deal means people negotiate and barter. Rich kids who just want to continue getting high don't comply and make concessions.

"Close supervision?' You cannot 'supervise' a grown child that refuses to accept any rules or requests. When their response is a 20 minute tantrum of screaming and throwing things and breaking things and flailing at you if you get close, it becomes a standoff. It's like a hostage situation where the rest of the family is held hostage.


He refused to go. End of Story according to him. Not going to go and you can't make me. And if you do drag me there I will just act out and get sent home.

He fooled you too then. You are taking him at his word when everyone knows that he is a master manipulator and talented liar..You say you have no reason not to believe him? He was a known liar and manipulator. Why take him at his word?

His whole sad complaint that all he wanted was love and attention from mummy and daddy is a master manipulation. He always had their full attention. Always.

I think you are grossly underestimating the amount of chaos and grief that he created within his household for all of those years. I guess unless you have lived it you would not understand. If you truly think that half of all adolescents meet his benchmark of aggression there you are way off, in my opinion.

They have now said that he was diagnosed as schizophrenic in his early years. I doubt that half of all adolescents meet that benchmark. He was truly a special case, imo.

YES, if you believe his story 'they never really tried.' But if you believe friends and family members, they tried and tried so much, that it interfered with the rest of their daily lives. It consumed them. It was all they worried about and dealt with most of the time. Just as he hoped.

It was rehab after rehab why???? Oh, because he kept getting high and kept refusing to follow the family rules of going to school and behaving at home.

ATTENTION? I don't understand this accusation that they didn't pay attention to him. That couldn't be further from the truth. And Nick made sure of that. They had to pay their full attention to him because he kept everyone on edge. He created chaos and uncertainty so they had to have full attention on him 24/7.

I lived this experience when I was growing up with a schizophrenic younger brother. My parents went though similar dynamics and it is exhausting and depressing and nerve wracking for everyone involved.

I don't understand all the criticism towards the parents who were doing the best they knew how to do. When a totally defiant, non compliant child puts all their energy into disruptive chaos, there is little anyone can do.
In my work, I witnessed exactly the nightmares you describe. The toll on family members: incalculable. I don’t think this is recognized nearly enough.

My heart’s with you — you put it eloquently.
 
  • #2,158
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A judge on Wednesday delayed Nick Reiner's arraignment in the killing of his parents, Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, after his high-profile defense attorney asked to be replaced by a public defender.

Judge Theresa McGonigle agreed to attorney Alan Jackson's request during a Los Angeles Superior Court hearing where Nick Reiner was expected to be arraigned and enter a plea 3 1/2 weeks after the beloved actor-director and his wife of 36 years were found dead with stab wounds in their home in the upscale Brentwood section of Los Angeles. Jackson did not say why he wanted to leave the case.

Deputy Public Defender Kimberly Greene then took over as Nick Reiner's attorney, and the judge delayed arraignment until Feb. 23. During his brief appearance, Reiner spoke only to agree to the delay.

[…]

If the siblings had agreed to pay the legal bill, but AJ had to step down, then the siblings could have arranged for another high profile attorney to step in.

But they went right to a public defender? That seems to mean that the family pulled back on their offer to pay the defense attorney ?
 
  • #2,159
  • #2,160
Last edited:

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
2,086
Total visitors
2,272

Forum statistics

Threads
637,255
Messages
18,711,485
Members
244,079
Latest member
Lycorn
Back
Top