OH - Spencer and Monique Tepe found shot to death at home 2 children unharmed, Columbus, 30 December 2025

[MesquiteO21]

If you take a step back and see what the BIL has been doing, it is just positive PR for how wholesome of a family the Tepes were. He is defending their reputation more than trying to find the murderer. In fact, he was trying to be neutral about the POI. No appeal from anyone in the family to find the murderer AFAIK. What does that tell you? I still think it is murder-suicide that the loved ones are trying to cover. JMO. We will know soon enough once the Police release all reports of their investigation.

i also noted that RM hasn't really seemed to say much to or about the perp. i think when he was asked what he would say to them he kept it pretty calm and just said they took 2 wonderful people. but i honestly don't blame him, he could be in fear himself. i don't know if i would necessarily go all "we're gonna find you, you [expletive]!" with the killer still on the loose. just a different perspective.
MOO

 

[BlaiseFinlay]

Wasn't the current POI walking in the alley behind the Tepe's home between 0200-0500?

People call 911 outside of homes all the time.

Right now there is a medical emergency dispatched on I-270 PulsePoint Respond

This is one of the reasons people are calling into question the BIL. It was the BIL who publicly undermined the police’s statement that the person in the alley is the POI, suggesting it could just be someone walking home from the bar.

Personally, I don’t believe that the BIL had that intention, but that is what has fueled some of the speculation in this thread.

 

[maamager]

And I find the modern attitude of making personal issues everyone's business troubling. If this issue led to these murders (which seems highly unlikely -- it's simply become a talking point as drama attracts people) and it really was someone with no connection to the deceased, it just makes it an even bigger shame.

Framing domestic conflict as something that should always be “kept in the home” is exactly the mindset that has historically kept people unsafe.

Calling for help when a situation feels volatile isn’t performative, it’s risk assessment. And the idea that people can always accurately predict, in real time, whether something will escalate ignores how domestic violence actually works. It’s easy to draw neat lines after the fact. It’s much harder — and more important — to acknowledge that early intervention and outside help are often the only reason situations don’t get worse.

Labeling calls for help as “performative” misses the reality that people don’t experience danger with hindsight clarity... Unless I have completely missed your point here. We can talk about warning signs, resources, and safety without turning someone else’s death into a referendum on private behavior or assuming causality that hasn’t been established.

 

[Sadi]

The excerpts of the article that were in the post I quoted.

There is the April 2025 call, and then the BIL said there was a call “a few years ago” made by a partygoer at their residence. He confused the two initially. We know the April 2025 call related to a domestic dispute, because it has been released. It’s my assumption that the reported partygoer’s call a few years ago also related to a domestic dispute, given the BIL thought the 2025 call was the one he was told about that happened a few years ago.

Thank you, I didn’t catch that.

 

[academyrd]

So we have either:

1) random skell / druggy wandering into a house opportunistically and up the stairs

2) professional hit hired by someone with a grudge or financial incentive

3) jealous plotting friend/relative/little brother, someone local and unstable but in their extended social circle

Place your bets, 1, 2 or 3?

 

[MesquiteO21]

So we have either:

1) random skell / druggy wandering into a house opportunistically and up the stairs

2) professional hit hired by someone with a grudge or financial incentive

3) jealous plotting friend/relative/little brother, someone local and unstable but in their extended social circle

Place your bets, 1, 2 or 3?

i find 1 pretty unlikely -- though not impossible. Between 2 and 3 i don't know, probably would lean more towards 3

MOO

 

[moonglow123]

In slight defense of the BIL's interviews, he did say "it could be a suspicious person or someone walking home from the bar, it's hard to say." But people are acting as though he said "It's definitely not a POI, disregard!"

When the video first emerged, a lot of people on other forums were saying it just looked like a drunk person stumbling home from the bar. So he's not exactly alone in that estimation.

I do think the police wouldn't have released that video unless they had something tying that person closer to the house and some certainty it's a POI versus a random straggler, but who knows.

 

[Cassie P]

Of course, GSR would 100% be tested and exclude either one from having fired a gun.

Also the entry/wound exits wounds, blood spatter etc. will tell them exactly where they would be shot. If they were both prone in bed that's where the blood would be pooling, how it dripped, the blood spatter, and obviously any penetrating shots into the mattress would all confirm this. An investigator would know right away, and forensics would confirm it without a doubt, They know this without the murder weapon present.

To explain further right now it was reported Spence was next to his bed, laying in a pool of blood. If he and Monique were shot in bed there would be clear evidence of the bullet entering at that angle into the mattress, collaborated by blood spatter/pooling, and GSR would exclude them discharging any weapon anytime soon.

Thank you for the information. This should put the M/S theory to rest.

 

[Sadi]

So we have either:

1) random skell / druggy wandering into a house opportunistically and up the stairs

2) professional hit hired by someone with a grudge or financial incentive

3) jealous plotting friend/relative/little brother, someone local and unstable but in their extended social circle

Place your bets, 1, 2 or 3?

3, I think it’s someone they’ve interacted with before, might not be someone close, but in their circle somehow.

 

[Cassie P]

So we have either:

1) random skell / druggy wandering into a house opportunistically and up the stairs

2) professional hit hired by someone with a grudge or financial incentive

3) jealous plotting friend/relative/little brother, someone local and unstable but in their extended social circle

Place your bets, 1, 2 or 3?

1. Random robber does not usually enter a home and commit a double homicide. Rare, but possible. This one should be lower on the probability list.

2. Why would a professional hit involve both spouses? If the issue is against the husband why kill the mother of two young children?
Why not hit the husband on his long isolated drive to and from work. Would be less dangerous in terms of detection.
What assets does this couple have that would merit a hired hit for financial reasons? If the hit is because of unpaid debt, how does hitting the major breadwinner ensure payment?
This is low on the list.

3. Given some of the new data, it does appear that the couple were sympathetic to people in distress and perhaps they were inadvertently drawn into a dangerous situation. This should be on the top of the list.

 

[Moon1871]

The excerpts of the article that were in the post I quoted.

There is the April 2025 call, and then the BIL said there was a call “a few years ago” made by a partygoer at their residence. He confused the two initially. We know the April 2025 call related to a domestic dispute, because it has been released. It’s my assumption that the reported partygoer’s call a few years ago also related to a domestic dispute, given the BIL thought the 2025 call was the one he was told about that happened a few years ago.

So, two 911 calls in the few years they lived at this address. That seems a bit much. IMO a red flag.

Plus the fact that family and co-workers were on high-alert so early in the morning, when ST and MT had not been reachable by phone for just one hour, tells me that there were already some concerns about the couple and their circumstances/safety.

 

[PGHJW]

Framing domestic conflict as something that should always be “kept in the home” is exactly the mindset that has historically kept people unsafe.

Calling for help when a situation feels volatile isn’t performative, it’s risk assessment. And the idea that people can always accurately predict, in real time, whether something will escalate ignores how domestic violence actually works. It’s easy to draw neat lines after the fact. It’s much harder — and more important — to acknowledge that early intervention and outside help are often the only reason situations don’t get worse.

Labeling calls for help as “performative” misses the reality that people don’t experience danger with hindsight clarity... Unless I have completely missed your point here. We can talk about warning signs, resources, and safety without turning someone else’s death into a referendum on private behavior or assuming causality that hasn’t been established.

You have, as have a few others, and there's nothing wrong with that. Some are looking at this as a time to champion domestic violence victims, which they absolutely deserve, when it ultimately likely has nothing to do with this case.

 

[waldojabba]

This is one of the reasons people are calling into question the BIL. It was the BIL who publicly undermined the police’s statement that the person in the alley is the POI, suggesting it could just be someone walking home from the bar.

Personally, I don’t believe that the BIL had that intention, but that is what has fueled some of the speculation in this thread.

My understanding regarding the terminology POI is that it means Person of Interest - not necessarily the PERP.

It could be someone who happened to be caught on camera in the vicinity and LE wants to talk to the person to get info if they saw anyone etc. So a POI can be someone who has information OR they could be involved in the killing.

I agree whole heartedly with the BIL that the guy we saw on camera in the alley could be the killer but it's also possible he is not.


JMO

edit to add- in the Brown University shooting the POI that LE was looking for, turned out to be the guy who led police to the killer and was totally NOT involved in the killing

 

[Cassie P]

So, two 911 calls in the few years they lived at this address. That seems a bit much. IMO a red flag.

Plus the fact that family and co-workers were on high-alert so early in the morning, when ST and MT had not been reachable by phone for just one hour, tells me that there were already some concerns about the couple and their circumstances/safety.

Yes puzzle pieces falling into place?

 

[PGHJW]

So we have either:

1) random skell / druggy wandering into a house opportunistically and up the stairs

2) professional hit hired by someone with a grudge or financial incentive

3) jealous plotting friend/relative/little brother, someone local and unstable but in their extended social circle

Place your bets, 1, 2 or 3?

This early it's often easy to say "we just don't know," but I feel as if we know a ton about these people and what happened. Because of that, I feel it's probably pretty well known to authorities exactly what happened. It's way too "neat" to be 1. Option 2 is an armchair detective's fantasy. It can happen but it's more likely to be a sixty minute drama episode than something that happened in this manner. "Extended social circle," whatever paths this went down (which is something we have nothing concrete on right now) is what everything is pointing to.

 

[BlaiseFinlay]

I'm sorry, but your understanding is not correct.

I’ve gone back through and checked the sources again. Are you simply saying that we don’t know if the prior incident the BIL told the media about actually resulted in a 911 call? You would be correct about that, I couldn’t find confirmation that he was actually aware that a 911 call had been made, just that he was aware of an incident that happened that lines up with the content of that 911 call.

What I find noteworthy is two incidents relating to domestic disputes happened in connection with their home. The first one may not have resulted in a 911 call and the second one may not have been people known to the Tepes, but we don’t know. And we have no reason to think the BIL knows, either.

 

[wibbleflea]

So, two 911 calls in the few years they lived at this address. That seems a bit much. IMO a red flag.

No strong evidence for any 911 calls from the house. The call from years ago was RM recently recalling an incident that Spencer had told him about but which may not have involved a call – we’ve certainly seen no evidence of it.

The second call, for which an audio recording has been made public, has no publicly known ties to the occupants of the house. It was a dispatcher calling back a number after the caller had hung up. We don’t hear an address being asked for. (That part of the call could have been edited out or she gave an address when making the call and then hung up.) But it’s not clear that she’s even inside the house – see posts about this above. And it’s a woman’s voice but very unlikely to be MT’s. Would suggest looking on other places to see the posts from MT’s friends and family, who knew her voice and are absolutely adamant it isn’t her.

 

[armchairagatha]

This early it's often easy to say "we just don't know," but I feel as if we know a ton about these people and what happened. Because of that, I feel it's probably pretty well known to authorities exactly what happened. It's way too "neat" to be 1. Option 2 is an armchair detective's fantasy. It can happen but it's more likely to be a sixty minute drama episode than something that happened in this manner. "Extended social circle," whatever paths this went down (which is something we have nothing concrete on right now) is what everything is pointing to.

Correction - we don't know a ton about these people. Just what the BIL has publicly shared. OTOH, LE definitely knows a lot by now and I expect they will come out and do a news conference of sorts pretty soon to give an update on the case. Isn't that typical in these types of cases?

 

[BlaiseFinlay]

And I find the modern attitude of making personal issues everyone's business troubling. If this issue led to these murders (which seems highly unlikely -- it's simply become a talking point as drama attracts people) and it really was someone with no connection to the deceased, it just makes it an even bigger shame.

Your problem lies with the media, not the victim.

 

[Diddian]

FTC issued a ban on non-compete clauses in 2024, and any prior clauses were deemed unenforceable. FTC issues ban on noncompete clauses

An Internet Archive search of the dental office URL indicates that he started his employment by June 2024.

That ban did not apply universally (as described in the text you linked). For example, senior level executives earning above a certain income level were excluded.

It also depends upon whatever the contractual relationship of Spencer was to other dentists or similar professionals in the practice, such as were they partners or shareholders, rather than employees.