UT - Couple shot, Maureen Fiore-Webster, 36, dies, Sandy, 3 Mar 2019

[PT1960]

Possible motives for this crime:

1) custody battle/revenge
2) intimate partner violence
3) monetary gain (was there an insurance policy?)
4) other?

 

[TatianaBarbie]

Possible motives for this crime:

1) custody battle/revenge
2) intimate partner violence
3) monetary gain (was there an insurance policy?)
4) other?

That was a good list you made, PT1960. I assume that motive #3 was monetary gain by the spouse/ex-spouse. I thought of another reason:

5) Property/money dispute with someone, i.e. it could be a neighbor, a "friend," or a business associate, etc.

 

[PT1960]

I think Maureen was the target. Don’t understand why though.

 

[meanmaryjean]

I think Maureen was the target. Don’t understand why though.

Agree. I have a theory- but I'm not 100% and it is not victim-friendly to the surviving victim. I do feel there must be substantial behind the scenes unraveling of complex evidence going on. At least I hope something is going on behind the scenes- my theory or another.

 

[Colorado303]

That was a good list you made, PT1960. I assume that motive #3 was monetary gain by the spouse/ex-spouse. I thought of another reason:

5) Property/money dispute with someone, i.e. it could be a neighbor, a "friend," or a business associate, etc.

My vote is for #1. We know the son wasn’t home. We know he was going to school in UT, not CA where his mother lived. We don’t know why but since it’s more common than not that parents want custody of their kids, it’s not unlikely the ex-wife wanted custody of her son. Or at least for him to be close enough to visit.

We know the husband wasn’t killed, but was seriously injured. If he was a participant it’s unlikely he would allow himself to be hurt so severely. If the ex-wife wanted his new spouse dead she might want him dead too, or she might not want her son to lose his father. Either way, I think he was shot accidentally or it was a kill shot that failed.

Shotgun is a sloppy weapon. Doubtful the shooter was an experienced assassin. IMO more likely “someone” paid or sweet-talked some idiot into taking out one or both of the victims.

Almost immediately after the murder LE announced their was no danger to the community. So they don’t think it was a local crazy on a rampage. A randomly hired gun toting idiot would likely be harder to catch than than someone who’s a known local criminal or involved in a business deal gone bad. And there’s no indication law enforcement has made any progress at all. None. I continue to be amazed at the apparent lack of effort by local LE and lack of interest by the local media. And suspect LE thinks they know who did it but don’t believe they’ll ever be able to prove it unless/until someone spills the beans.

It makes sense someone whose wife was gunned down in their house in a town that wasn’t a long-term home would choose to leave that town. And return “home”. In this case to CA. Whether she was involved or not, It appears the ex-wife may well have gotten what she wanted.

My opinion only based on very limited info.

Does anyone know what current custody arrangements for the boy look like?

 

[PT1960]

I think it’s possible but statistically unlikely.

 

[PT1960]

Just to clarify. I think it’s possible but I don’t think the ex is responsible.
1) don’t think she pulled the trigger
2) why kill Maureen first...(anger would be directed more at Jeff)
3) whose she going to hire to do this crazy hit and keep it quiet...

 

[moolz]

The ex does not live in CA- she lives in Utah.

 

[Colorado303]

The ex does not live in CA- she lives in Utah.

thanks for clearing that up. I heard she was in CA. I also heard he had primary custody. Was that not true either?

 

[moolz]

thanks for clearing that up. I heard she was in CA. I also heard he had primary custody. Was that not true either?

He and Maureen had just (maybe a week earlier?) been awarded full custody.

 

[Colorado303]

He and Maureen had just (maybe a week earlier?) been awarded full custody.

Thank you. That’s what I thought but didn’t realize it was that recently. I imagine the party who lost wasn’t happy at all. My heart is breaking for Dad and son. I hope they are OK.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

He and Maureen had just (maybe a week earlier?) been awarded full custody.

Well that explains a lot. IMO

 

[Colorado303]

Well that explains a lot. IMO

IMO too. I just hope LE can prove whoever is responsible did it and there is justice for Maureen.

 

[PT1960]

Not sure I agree. Nothing seems to have been explained here. Only one real victim and I struggle mightily with why any would want to harm her. This isn’t a simple case.

 

[PT1960]

The ex had to have an ironclad alibi. Otherwise she would have been in LE frame.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Not sure I agree. Nothing seems to have been explained here. Only one real victim and I struggle mightily with why any would want to harm her. This isn’t a simple case.

I don’t know, but Maybe Maureen was murdered to get her out of the way, with the ex wife hoping to reconcile with Jeff?
Or maybe the ex hated Maureen & was terribly jealous since she had become so active in the child’s life.
I really don’t know the circumstances and the relationship between the three involved, so just throwing a couple ideas out.

 

[Colorado303]

The ex had to have an ironclad alibi. Otherwise she would have been in LE frame.

Just because somebody wasn’t there to pull the trigger doesn’t mean they’re not guilty. I have no idea if the ex-wife was involved, but an iron clad alibi doesn’t mean much in this case.

MOO

 

[PT1960]

Agree.

My feeling is it was a hired hit.

Just not sure who did the hiring.
1 the Ex
2 the husband

 

[PT1960]

Would be interested to know what the detective who worked this case thought. I bet they knew who set this up but could not provide enough evidence to bring charge.

Also, you wonder if they didn’t pursue the case as energetically as they might have due to Maureen’s background/being an “outsider” in the community.

 

[meanmaryjean]

Would be interested to know what the detective who worked this case thought. I bet they knew who set this up but could not provide enough evidence to bring charge.

Also, you wonder if they didn’t pursue the case as energetically as they might have due to Maureen’s background/being an “outsider” in the community.

I's a little confused by you saying the 'detective who worked this case' - past tense- as if the investigation is over. And I think it is a stttrrreeetttccchhh to say they would not pursue the case as energetically due to her background. Do you have evidence of this?

What I see is a VERY puzzling and complex case which requires checking out a lot of people, situations, backgrounds, digital footprints perhaps. I think this case will be solved and there will be solid evidence to back it up.