Latest / Legally Brunette / Legally Brunette Presents: ‘Til Death Do Us Part - Linda Stermer’s Double Attack

Transcript

Legally Brunette Presents: ‘Til Death Do Us Part - Linda Stermer’s Double Attack · Legally Brunette

0:01
Speaker 1: Hi, guys, Welcome to Till Death Do Us Part. I
0:04
Speaker 1: will be your host today Emily Simpson with Jane again
0:09
Speaker 1: Till Death Do Us Part. We like to discuss cases
0:11
Speaker 1: that have to do with wives who have murdered their
0:15
Speaker 1: husbands or husbands who have murdered their wives. And I'm
0:17
Speaker 1: telling you there seems to be no indication that we
0:21
Speaker 1: will ever run out.
0:22
Speaker 2: Of It's not an economy based so.
0:26
Speaker 1: Every time I think, oh my gosh, are we ever
0:29
Speaker 1: going to run out.
0:29
Speaker 2: Of cases, there.
0:33
Speaker 1: Will be murdered. You're right, Okay, all right, let's just
0:36
Speaker 1: go through a brief synopsis of this case. Also, this case,
0:39
Speaker 1: by the way, was recommended, so thank you guys. I
0:41
Speaker 1: truly do appreciate that you guys listen. And then you
0:44
Speaker 1: also have cases that you recommend, so this is recommended
0:47
Speaker 1: to me. The woman's name, this is the wife. Her
0:50
Speaker 1: name is Linda Sturmer, and she was convicted of killing
0:53
Speaker 1: her husband, Todd Sturmer, at their home in Van Buren County, Michigan.
0:57
Speaker 1: This was back in two thousand and seven. To take
1:00
Speaker 1: a little little time machine here and go back to
1:02
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven. According to the prosecution, on the
1:06
Speaker 1: night of January seventh, two thousand and seven, Linda set
1:09
Speaker 1: fire to the family home and then ran over Todd
1:12
Speaker 1: with the family van as he tried to escape the
1:14
Speaker 1: burning house.
1:15
Speaker 2: A family van family van.
1:18
Speaker 1: Todd died from the injuries. Prosecutors argued that Linda was
1:22
Speaker 1: motivated by a combination of an extramarital affair and a
1:26
Speaker 1: desire to collect life insurance money. Linda has always maintained
1:30
Speaker 1: her innocence, claiming that the fire was accidental and that
1:33
Speaker 1: she struck Todd with the van by accident after he
1:36
Speaker 1: emerged from the burning house. She was convicted of first
1:40
Speaker 1: degree murder back in twenty ten and then sentenced again
1:43
Speaker 1: to life in prison without paroles.
1:45
Speaker 2: So she like, the house caught on fire, and she
1:48
Speaker 2: got in the van to drive away, and then left
1:51
Speaker 2: the husband behind and he tried to get in the
1:53
Speaker 2: family van and she ran over him.
1:54
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're going to talk more about that because we're
1:57
Speaker 1: going to go more into in depth as to what
1:59
Speaker 1: actual occurred if and I want your opinion on it,
2:03
Speaker 1: because you always you always have great opinions or Shane. So, however,
2:07
Speaker 1: Linda's conviction was vacated in twenty eighteen when a federal
2:11
Speaker 1: judge decided she didn't get a favorite trial the first time,
2:15
Speaker 1: so she actually had two trials. She was let out
2:17
Speaker 1: of prison after spending almost nine years there. Not long
2:20
Speaker 1: after her release, Linda was retried, so she went to
2:23
Speaker 1: trial for a second time and a jury re sentenced
2:26
Speaker 1: her in April of twenty twenty five, so this is recently.
2:29
Speaker 2: So she got found guilty twice and sentenced twice.
2:32
Speaker 1: Yes, despite everything, Linda has continued to maintain her innocence throughout.
2:38
Speaker 1: There's also if you guys are interested, there is a
2:40
Speaker 1: I believe it's forty eight hours. There is a forty
2:43
Speaker 1: eight hours episode about this case and they interview Linda,
2:49
Speaker 1: So you can actually watch that if you want.
2:52
Speaker 2: To be like forty eight hours within the reporting of
2:56
Speaker 2: the crime.
2:56
Speaker 1: So the forty eight hours time period is the time
3:00
Speaker 1: period when she is home after her first trial and
3:02
Speaker 1: then she was granted a retrial, so she's home for
3:05
Speaker 1: a little bit, so they do a forty eight hours
3:07
Speaker 1: they interview her, but it's prior to her being convicted
3:10
Speaker 1: the second time. Oh okay, so she's actually somewhat free
3:14
Speaker 1: during that time period that she does is interview and
3:16
Speaker 1: she does this forty eight hours episode.
3:18
Speaker 2: So interesting.
3:19
Speaker 1: All right, let's go through a little timeline. Let's talk
3:22
Speaker 1: about the early lives and the marriage. So Linda met
3:24
Speaker 1: Todd Sturmer in nineteen eighty nine when they were both
3:27
Speaker 1: twenty five years old. She had separated from a previous
3:30
Speaker 1: partner and had two young daughters from that relationship. They
3:33
Speaker 1: were Ashley and Brittany. Ashley and Brittany obviously are adults
3:37
Speaker 1: now and they are in the episode they interview them
3:39
Speaker 1: towards the end.
3:40
Speaker 2: Okay.
3:41
Speaker 1: In August of nineteen ninety three, Linda and Todd are married,
3:45
Speaker 1: and then they have two sons together, Trevor and Trenton
3:48
Speaker 1: Their household also included Lenda's nephew, Corey. Todd took him
3:53
Speaker 1: in to raise as his own after Corey came from
3:55
Speaker 1: a difficult home situation. I think Corey was two at
3:58
Speaker 1: the time. The way Linda presents it is that Todd said,
4:02
Speaker 1: why don't you have Corey come live with us and
4:03
Speaker 1: we'll raise him. So there's the two daughters that she
4:06
Speaker 1: had previously that Todd raises, And the way she describes
4:11
Speaker 1: it is Todd was happy to marry her with the
4:13
Speaker 1: two daughters, like he wanted to be a family man.
4:16
Speaker 1: He wanted to get married.
4:17
Speaker 2: Of course, he didn't know she was a killer.
4:19
Speaker 1: Well, he was unaware at that point. Linda and Todd's
4:22
Speaker 1: marriage was reportedly turbulent and with later testimony surfacing that
4:27
Speaker 1: there were accusations of domestic abuse on both sides, as
4:31
Speaker 1: well as financial strain. Then we get to two thousand
4:35
Speaker 1: and six. Linda begins an affair with a coworker named
4:38
Speaker 1: Chris Williams.
4:39
Speaker 2: She had the affair.
4:40
Speaker 1: She had the affair.
4:41
Speaker 2: He had the affair, so she wanted to kill him.
4:43
Speaker 2: She had an affair, so she wants to kill him.
4:46
Speaker 1: I guess, I mean, or he just irritates her. I
4:49
Speaker 1: don't know, but she has an affair.
4:52
Speaker 2: Well, I irritate You don't get any idea, all right.
4:54
Speaker 1: Williams later testified that the affair lasted until about a
4:58
Speaker 1: month after Todd's death and two thousand and seven. So
5:02
Speaker 1: on January sixth of two thousand and seven, Todd discovered
5:05
Speaker 1: Linda's affair with Chris Williams and told her that he
5:08
Speaker 1: wanted a divorce. I think that's you have to pay
5:10
Speaker 1: attention to the dates here. That's January six of two
5:13
Speaker 1: thousand and seven. Allegedly, Todd discovers the affair and tells
5:17
Speaker 1: her that he wants a divorce. So on the night
5:21
Speaker 1: of January seventh, two thousand and seven, so this is
5:23
Speaker 1: the next day. According to Linda's two sons, she sent
5:27
Speaker 1: them out of the house. She didn't even allow them
5:30
Speaker 1: to say goodbye to their dad, who they believe was
5:32
Speaker 1: drugged by her at that point. The two sons are
5:36
Speaker 1: also in this forty eight hours episode.
5:38
Speaker 2: But these are now his sons right there, his biological sons. Sons,
5:42
Speaker 2: they had children.
5:42
Speaker 1: They get two boys together, and this is their mother.
5:45
Speaker 1: They interview the sons. They're adults now, they interview them
5:50
Speaker 1: in this forty eight hours episode. The sons are no
5:53
Speaker 1: fans of their mother at by by any by any
5:57
Speaker 1: means at all. Well, that's a good thing, they claim. Well,
6:01
Speaker 1: the daughters stand by her, that's a bad thing. So,
6:05
Speaker 1: but the sons don't want anything to do with her. Mom.
6:10
Speaker 1: So the sons claim that she was trying to get
6:12
Speaker 1: them out of the house. So I guess she was
6:13
Speaker 1: trying to send them to a movie or telling them
6:14
Speaker 1: to go to a movie with a friend.
6:16
Speaker 2: I don't know. You just need to be gone, Yeah,
6:17
Speaker 2: just get out.
6:18
Speaker 1: And they believe that she drugged the husband at that
6:22
Speaker 1: point because I guess they said something to the effect
6:24
Speaker 1: of he was sleeping and they wanted to go in
6:26
Speaker 1: and say goodbye to him, and she wouldn't let them
6:28
Speaker 1: go in the room. He did. According to the autopsy,
6:34
Speaker 1: they did find oxy in his system, but it was
6:38
Speaker 1: not in his blood. It was found in his urine,
6:41
Speaker 1: and I guess that means I guess that means that
6:44
Speaker 1: it had been in the system for a while. So
6:47
Speaker 1: I don't know if that means that she's the one
6:51
Speaker 1: that gave him the oxy, or that he had taken
6:53
Speaker 1: it and then it was out of his blood system
6:55
Speaker 1: and into his urine, But I don't know. That's a
6:57
Speaker 1: fact that came up during trial. According to the prosecution,
7:01
Speaker 1: Linda struck Todd with an object while he slept or
7:04
Speaker 1: shortly before the fire, doused him in the living room
7:07
Speaker 1: with gasoline and set the house ablaze. Linda claims that
7:12
Speaker 1: she was in the basement doing laundry around three pm
7:16
Speaker 1: and that Todd was in the living room and that
7:19
Speaker 1: she heard a blood curdling scream that was her husband,
7:23
Speaker 1: and that she ran up the stairs and that when
7:25
Speaker 1: she ran up the stairs, he was on fire, and
7:28
Speaker 1: so the fire was so bad that she couldn't help
7:32
Speaker 1: him or intervene in any way. She had to just
7:35
Speaker 1: get out of the house.
7:36
Speaker 2: So that's when she sore he was so on fire
7:39
Speaker 2: that she had to leave.
7:40
Speaker 1: She had to leave. Now.
7:42
Speaker 2: Also, I don't know if you mentioned it, how much
7:45
Speaker 2: time had passed between the supposed he caught on fire
7:50
Speaker 2: magically and when the children left.
7:53
Speaker 1: I don't know. I believe she was trying to get
7:54
Speaker 1: them out of the house earlier that day. And then
7:56
Speaker 1: she claims that she was doing laundry at three pm,
7:59
Speaker 1: and then that's when she heard scream, and then that's
8:01
Speaker 1: when she ran into the living room and he's on fire.
8:04
Speaker 2: You're going to get into it. But what's her explanation
8:05
Speaker 2: and how he caught on fire? Oh, she claims, I'm fifty,
8:09
Speaker 2: I've never caught on fire.
8:10
Speaker 1: You've never caught on fire.
8:11
Speaker 2: And I've played with fire and I've never caught on fire.
8:13
Speaker 1: How have you played with fire?
8:14
Speaker 2: What do you mean you played with matches? Fireworks?
8:16
Speaker 1: Oh? Yeah, Shane's big family.
8:19
Speaker 2: When we first got married, not anymore, not anymore.
8:21
Speaker 1: No, but when we were first married. We lived in Utah.
8:23
Speaker 1: Shane set up all these I will never forget you
8:26
Speaker 1: set up all those were those those pipes.
8:28
Speaker 2: I built all all these pipes. It was like ten
8:30
Speaker 2: fifteen pipes. Yeah, just put ball rockets in all of those,
8:33
Speaker 2: launched them all at the same time. Yeah, that's beside the point. Okay,
8:36
Speaker 2: I never caught on fire. So what's her explanation is
8:39
Speaker 2: to how he caught on fire?
8:40
Speaker 1: She claims that he had like an oil lamp, and
8:43
Speaker 1: that he and that he liked oil lamps, and so
8:46
Speaker 1: he must have been doing something with an oil lamp.
8:49
Speaker 1: I don't know. Also, the house that they live in,
8:53
Speaker 1: he built the house himself. And if you you can
8:55
Speaker 1: kind of see the home, it doesn't look like it's
8:58
Speaker 1: structurally sound. It doesn't look like it was built correctly.
9:02
Speaker 1: It looks like it was kind of amateurish, half amateurish,
9:05
Speaker 1: and kind of haphazardly put together.
9:07
Speaker 2: I expect one the guy likes to play the oil lambs.
9:09
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly.
9:17
Speaker 2: So.
9:17
Speaker 1: According to the prosecution, they claimed that Linda struck Todd
9:20
Speaker 1: with something while he was asleep, doused him in the
9:23
Speaker 1: living room with gasoline, and then set the house ablaze
9:26
Speaker 1: and then ran out of the house. Todd ran out
9:29
Speaker 1: of the front door with his upper body engulfed in flames.
9:32
Speaker 1: Linda then climbed into the family van and ran him
9:35
Speaker 1: over in the driveway. Here's what she says in the interview.
9:38
Speaker 1: She claims that because the fire was so bad, she
9:41
Speaker 1: couldn't get to him, so she leaves the house and
9:45
Speaker 1: she jumps into the family van, which by the way,
9:47
Speaker 1: had the keys in it ready to go. She also
9:50
Speaker 1: claims that she didn't have access to a cell phone,
9:53
Speaker 1: even though Linda owns two sols.
9:54
Speaker 2: My next question was she did all this before she
9:57
Speaker 2: called there?
9:58
Speaker 1: Yes, she claims that she did and have a cell
10:00
Speaker 1: phone on her even though she owned two cell phones.
10:03
Speaker 1: She jumps into the van and according to her, she's
10:08
Speaker 1: trying to go get help, drive somewhere to go get.
10:12
Speaker 2: Help, to drive to the fire station.
10:14
Speaker 1: Yes, she's could drive somewhere to get help, but she
10:17
Speaker 1: can't get the van.
10:19
Speaker 2: She could go to the neighbor's house. Are they in zone.
10:21
Speaker 1: They're a r Yeah, it's far away. But she claims
10:25
Speaker 1: that she's trying to drive the van to go get help,
10:28
Speaker 1: but she's unable to get the van because it's muddy
10:31
Speaker 1: and the tires are spinning. But then she claims that
10:34
Speaker 1: she like looks out the window of the van and
10:36
Speaker 1: Todd is laying, you know, burned, laying next to the van.
10:41
Speaker 2: Ran over this not ran over.
10:43
Speaker 1: She claims that she just sees him out of the
10:45
Speaker 1: window of the van and that she jumps out of
10:47
Speaker 1: the van, or she yells at him to get in
10:49
Speaker 1: the van or something. I think she's like, get in
10:51
Speaker 1: the van. Van messing around. I know you're badly burned,
10:55
Speaker 1: but get in the van. He doesn't get in the van, obviously,
10:59
Speaker 1: And so she claims that she tried to drive the
11:02
Speaker 1: van around to this sandy area of the home so
11:05
Speaker 1: that she could get traction on the tires so that
11:07
Speaker 1: she could go get help.
11:09
Speaker 2: But she had a drive somewhere to then get Sam
11:16
Speaker 2: on the tires.
11:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, to get tracked doesn't make sense on the tires, Okay.
11:20
Speaker 2: At this point, is he not getting the van because
11:22
Speaker 2: he's like, no, you're trying to kill me. You set
11:24
Speaker 2: me on fire.
11:25
Speaker 1: Well, he's not talking. He's badly burned. Yeah, and he's outside.
11:29
Speaker 1: And then she claims that she drove the van to
11:31
Speaker 1: get to the sandy area, but then she goes back
11:35
Speaker 1: and then the neighbors call nine one one. I believe
11:37
Speaker 1: there's some neighbors that see the house on fire. But
11:41
Speaker 1: the interesting thing is he is bloody and he's he's
11:46
Speaker 1: almost dead by the time that the ambulance gets there.
11:49
Speaker 1: They do try to use like a defibrillator or something,
11:51
Speaker 1: and I think they do try to give him CPR,
11:53
Speaker 1: but he's so badly burned that it's impossible. I do
11:56
Speaker 1: think he's breathing slightly in the end, but he ends
11:59
Speaker 1: up dying. But he also has injuries on the top
12:03
Speaker 1: of his head like blatshorse trauma. And there's also blood
12:08
Speaker 1: on the van and on the undercarriage of the van.
12:11
Speaker 2: So she.
12:14
Speaker 1: Maybe, but you couldn't see them because the body was
12:16
Speaker 1: so badly burned. But there's blood on the van, the
12:20
Speaker 1: front of the van, and on the undercarriage of the van,
12:23
Speaker 1: and he has blunt horse trauma to his head. I
12:26
Speaker 1: believe once it got to trial, it was never They
12:28
Speaker 1: were never able to distinguish from the medical examiner whether
12:32
Speaker 1: the blunt force trauma on his head was from being
12:35
Speaker 1: ran over by the van or being hit with some
12:38
Speaker 1: type of object to I would assume maybe she did
12:42
Speaker 1: drug him to get him incapacitated. Then maybe she did
12:47
Speaker 1: dowse him with galsolene and set him on fire. Then
12:50
Speaker 1: I think the expectation was that she was going to
12:53
Speaker 1: drive away and he was going to burn in the house. Right,
12:56
Speaker 1: But then when she's driving away and he's managed to
12:59
Speaker 1: come out of that house and he's next to the van,
13:01
Speaker 1: then she's like, now what do I do?
13:04
Speaker 2: Right? Well, if she drove away, if he had stayed
13:07
Speaker 2: in the home and just and and died from the injuries, yeah,
13:11
Speaker 2: then what do you think her story was to be?
13:13
Speaker 2: I ran out, I didn't on my phone, so I
13:16
Speaker 2: got my car, and I still drove away to get help.
13:17
Speaker 1: I think her story was I was driving to get
13:20
Speaker 1: help and he just died in the fire.
13:22
Speaker 2: Yeah, he wrote over her plans.
13:24
Speaker 1: Okay, but let me tell you something else. And this
13:25
Speaker 1: is interesting and I don't really know what to do
13:27
Speaker 1: with this information. Todd owned two homes previous to this one,
13:31
Speaker 1: and they both.
13:33
Speaker 2: Burned down, burned down. Then they probably run an insurance scam,
13:37
Speaker 2: and that's where she learned like, oh, I can burn
13:39
Speaker 2: this house down and won't get caught. You know, get
13:42
Speaker 2: an insurance, some insurance.
13:44
Speaker 1: Payout, So you think he probably intentionally burned the two
13:48
Speaker 1: private houses down some type of insurance payout. But then
13:51
Speaker 1: maybe he told her that he did that, and then
13:52
Speaker 1: that's where she got the idea.
13:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, wasn't it the other week when when it was
13:56
Speaker 2: the what was it the mom taught the daughter taught
13:59
Speaker 2: the mom how to killed the husband.
14:01
Speaker 1: With the poison?
14:01
Speaker 2: Y're right, Yeah, So she's like, I did it and
14:04
Speaker 2: I got away with it. Yeah, so you can do it.
14:06
Speaker 2: So then she's probably thinking, like, oh, we burn homes
14:08
Speaker 2: all the time, it's normal, and I get away with it.
14:11
Speaker 2: No one questions me, all right, so let.
14:13
Speaker 1: Me just we talked about this already. So according to Linda,
14:17
Speaker 1: she was doing laundry in the basement when she heard
14:19
Speaker 1: Todd let out a chilling screen we talked about. She
14:21
Speaker 1: ran upstairs to find the living room engulfed in flames,
14:23
Speaker 1: with Todd in the middle of it trying to fight
14:25
Speaker 1: the fire. Unable to reach him, she fled the house barefoot,
14:29
Speaker 1: with no jacket and no phone. Again, she owns two
14:31
Speaker 1: cell phones. She has consistently maintained that hitting Todd with
14:35
Speaker 1: the van was a tragic accident, and the chaos of
14:38
Speaker 1: the moment. She claims that it was dark, it was raining,
14:41
Speaker 1: it was muddy, she was trying to drive, she was
14:43
Speaker 1: trying to get traction on the tires, and that she
14:45
Speaker 1: accidentally hit him with the van.
14:47
Speaker 2: She couldn't see the flames.
14:49
Speaker 1: Investigators eventually found gasoline on Todd's body and clothing, and
14:53
Speaker 1: discovered that Todd's blood was on the underside of the
14:55
Speaker 1: family van. This was physical evidence that became central to
15:00
Speaker 1: to the prosecution's case. The investigation took roughly two and
15:03
Speaker 1: a half years.
15:04
Speaker 2: Did I make it up or did you say that
15:06
Speaker 2: they were he was upstairs or anything like that?
15:08
Speaker 1: Well, she was downstairs in the basement doing laundry. So
15:10
Speaker 1: then when she claims that she heard him scream, she
15:13
Speaker 1: claims she ran up to like he's.
15:14
Speaker 2: On the main floor. Yeah, okay, because something And why
15:17
Speaker 2: why would someone have gasoline one on them, like all
15:22
Speaker 2: over dubast on it. But then too, why would they
15:24
Speaker 2: have gasoline inside the house. So it's an accelerator, right
15:26
Speaker 2: and then what they call it? Yeah, so I mean
15:28
Speaker 2: that's suspicious right then and there, Well, she had no
15:30
Speaker 2: gasoline on he was on his motorcycle or anything.
15:33
Speaker 1: But he had the investigation found that he had gasoline
15:36
Speaker 1: on his clothing, and apparently she was seen. I think
15:40
Speaker 1: there's you know, video surveillance or whatever. She had gone
15:43
Speaker 1: to a gas station early that morning, and she had
15:46
Speaker 1: bought breakfast and eleven dollars worth of gas. She claims
15:51
Speaker 1: that she filled the family van with the gas, the
15:53
Speaker 1: eleven dollars worth of gas.
15:55
Speaker 2: But there's also a gas What world is eleven dollars?
15:58
Speaker 2: Is anyone buying eleven dollars six.
16:00
Speaker 1: Two thousand and seven?
16:02
Speaker 2: Okay, all right, it's still not likely.
16:04
Speaker 1: But and then but the gas station attendant, but this
16:09
Speaker 1: is this is one of those eyewitness testimonies where it's
16:12
Speaker 1: like they think maybe that she could they could have
16:16
Speaker 1: seen her putting gas, not in the in the gas tank.
16:21
Speaker 1: But so there's that. Her defense attorney was Jeff Getting,
16:25
Speaker 1: who later became Kalamazoo County Prosecutor. After a five day trial.
16:30
Speaker 2: That question would be if they probably didn't do this,
16:33
Speaker 2: but they look at the family van, was it full? Oh?
16:36
Speaker 1: Did it have it? You mean did it eleven dollars
16:39
Speaker 1: worth of gas?
16:40
Speaker 2: Well, if it wasn't full, let's say it was three
16:41
Speaker 2: a quarter of a tank. Yeah, it's like well, would
16:44
Speaker 2: you do biolin, what do you mean you filled it
16:45
Speaker 2: up and you bout eleven dollars? Or if it's half
16:47
Speaker 2: a tank, who goes with a quarter of tank gas
16:50
Speaker 2: and only puts an eleven dollars?
16:52
Speaker 1: Well, she claims that they had I don't know. I
16:55
Speaker 1: mean maybe the excuse is she only had eleven dollars
16:58
Speaker 1: to put gas in the car. I don't know. And
17:01
Speaker 1: she claims that she was putting gas in the car
17:02
Speaker 1: so that the boys had the vehicle to be able
17:04
Speaker 1: to use, to be able to leave the house and
17:07
Speaker 1: use the van. But also she says in her interview
17:13
Speaker 1: that Todd was having or they together they're married, were
17:17
Speaker 1: having severe financial issues and that he had borrowed like
17:21
Speaker 1: he was in debt seventy five thousand dollars.
17:23
Speaker 2: Is what has two payouts of the homes that he
17:26
Speaker 2: burned didn't last long.
17:27
Speaker 1: Right, so he was in debt seventy five thousand. He
17:30
Speaker 1: had recently borrowed money from his mom that she was
17:33
Speaker 1: unaware of. And she also claimed that he didn't like
17:36
Speaker 1: to work. I guess she said. She said he had
17:39
Speaker 1: his own company, and then you know, she said that
17:42
Speaker 1: he sells gloves and some hunting gloves and hunting type
17:46
Speaker 1: of outfits, but he doesn't work very much, and he
17:48
Speaker 1: doesn't really and I'm thinking, how do you survive selling
17:51
Speaker 1: gloves and some hunting out and.
17:53
Speaker 2: He collects the insurance proceeds.
17:55
Speaker 1: Right, So I don't know if her intent was to
18:01
Speaker 1: get an insurance payout on that home but also get
18:04
Speaker 1: rid of the husband so she doesn't.
18:05
Speaker 2: Have to share the money able to have insurance.
18:08
Speaker 1: I never heard anything about any kind of life insurance,
18:10
Speaker 1: and I would assume if they were so financially, you know,
18:14
Speaker 1: in dead and struggling, and he didn't really have She worked,
18:17
Speaker 1: she had a full time job, but maybe they weren't,
18:21
Speaker 1: you know, paying for some type of insurance policy. I
18:23
Speaker 1: think they were just banking on burning houses down. But
18:26
Speaker 1: I think she learned, and you're right, maybe she learned
18:27
Speaker 1: to burn the house down for the insurance proceeds, but
18:29
Speaker 1: she thought, I'll just burn him in it and then
18:32
Speaker 1: I don't have to deal with him.
18:33
Speaker 2: Maybe the previous two homes she tried to burn him
18:35
Speaker 2: in it, and I.
18:36
Speaker 1: Don't know if they were married at that point. I
18:38
Speaker 1: think these were two homes that he had owned previously.
18:41
Speaker 1: So then Linda appeals her first conviction. She claims that,
18:46
Speaker 1: I mean, just to break it down, there was a
18:47
Speaker 1: lot of there were a lot of assertions made about
18:51
Speaker 1: why she should be granted a new trial. But I
18:54
Speaker 1: think what it really came down to was it was
18:56
Speaker 1: ineffective legal counsel for her. I guess her defends attorney
19:00
Speaker 1: never put on a fire expert. So the prosecution had
19:05
Speaker 1: an expert, an arson expert, but her defense never put
19:09
Speaker 1: on any type.
19:10
Speaker 2: Of fire fire science expert.
19:12
Speaker 1: Fire fire science expert. And also there were some other
19:15
Speaker 1: things as well. So anyway, she gets granted a new trial,
19:18
Speaker 1: which is I mean, that's kind of would be an expert.
19:21
Speaker 2: It's like your husband had gasoline all over them. Well,
19:23
Speaker 2: I think that I ran over him. Maybe those people
19:27
Speaker 2: would help their husband on fire, she ran over him. Yeah,
19:30
Speaker 2: I mean there's a lot of it's a lot circumstantial, but.
19:33
Speaker 1: Well, I think the point, I think the point that
19:35
Speaker 1: she was granted a new trial is because it was
19:37
Speaker 1: an effective counsel. Her defense attorney didn't put on any
19:40
Speaker 1: type of defense didn't put on any type of fire expert,
19:44
Speaker 1: or do the due diligence that you should do to effectively.
19:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, but she but I was right. She just went
19:49
Speaker 2: back to jail anyway, she did.
19:51
Speaker 1: But she got out for a while. So in twenty eighteen,
20:01
Speaker 1: a federal district court granted her a conditional writ of
20:04
Speaker 1: habeas corpus. A conditional writ of habeas corpus is a
20:09
Speaker 1: type of court order that grants a prisoner's petition, meaning
20:13
Speaker 1: that they are found to be illegally detained. Did you
20:15
Speaker 1: know what habeas corpus means? Doesn't it mean?
20:17
Speaker 2: Like?
20:17
Speaker 1: It mean? What does it mean in Latin? I've looked
20:19
Speaker 1: this up before. It literally means like holding onto the
20:22
Speaker 1: body or something, right, something like that.
20:24
Speaker 2: Yeah, holding the body because you have to charge on
20:27
Speaker 2: or release some kind of thing.
20:28
Speaker 1: Right. So she's claiming that she was in prison illegally
20:32
Speaker 1: because she did not receive a fair trial, meaning they
20:35
Speaker 1: are both found to be illegally detained, but delays their
20:38
Speaker 1: release or relief, allowing the state or government to correct
20:41
Speaker 1: the legal error within a specified time frame. So that's
20:44
Speaker 1: how in twenty eighteen she gets released and then she
20:48
Speaker 1: ends up being retried, so the US court of a pail.
20:52
Speaker 2: I just looked it up then, So she's released in
20:54
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen, Uh huh, And then she the second trial.
20:58
Speaker 2: She was convicted in twenty twenty five, so she had
21:00
Speaker 2: almost seven years of freedom.
21:03
Speaker 1: Yeah, if you will, right.
21:04
Speaker 2: I wonder what she did with herself for seven years.
21:07
Speaker 1: I don't know, what do you want to ask her?
21:08
Speaker 2: Like? No, I mean, like did she think like, oh,
21:09
Speaker 2: I'm going to start a career, I'm going to get
21:11
Speaker 2: a job, I'm going to start dating. Like did she
21:13
Speaker 2: like start to live and then he just got ripped
21:15
Speaker 2: out from her again? Yeah, well that's because I wouldn't
21:18
Speaker 2: date her.
21:18
Speaker 1: The forty eight Hours episode is prior to her going
21:21
Speaker 1: back to prison. Yeah, in twenty twenty five. She just
21:24
Speaker 1: went back last April. She just went back at your
21:27
Speaker 1: like I'm back. Yeah.
21:28
Speaker 2: So I mean they just get her old digs back
21:30
Speaker 2: and I need to do.
21:32
Speaker 1: An updated episode on what she did during those seven years.
21:35
Speaker 1: That's that would be interesting. That's what we want to know.
21:38
Speaker 1: We want to know what Linda did for the past.
21:39
Speaker 2: That's what that was the first question I asked.
21:41
Speaker 1: I know, but that's all I sorry. I agree with you.
21:43
Speaker 2: That could be a reality show in between, like prison
21:46
Speaker 2: sentences in between.
21:48
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, just stuck.
21:49
Speaker 2: In the middle, not knowing what it's kind of like
21:51
Speaker 2: a lame duck. It is like, what do I do?
21:53
Speaker 1: I get a job right now? Am I going back
21:55
Speaker 1: to prison?
21:56
Speaker 2: I don't know, pot some loans and go to jail down.
22:01
Speaker 1: The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed
22:03
Speaker 1: that ruling and Sturmer v. Warren and the Sixth Circuit
22:06
Speaker 1: found that the prosecutor had repeatedly branded Linda a liar,
22:10
Speaker 1: misrepresented her testimony, and disparaged her while bolstering other witnesses
22:15
Speaker 1: during closing arguments. You know, I don't know what what
22:18
Speaker 1: the what the fine line is there, but obviously when
22:21
Speaker 1: the prosecutor does a closing argument, he's going to brand
22:24
Speaker 1: her as a liar because that's their whole.
22:26
Speaker 2: That's why your case, you're a defendant. We don't believe you.
22:29
Speaker 2: That's their case.
22:30
Speaker 1: That she that she burned her husband alive and that
22:33
Speaker 1: she ran over him and that now she's lying about it.
22:36
Speaker 2: My client is offended that they.
22:39
Speaker 1: Were called a liaress. They found that getting this is
22:43
Speaker 1: Linda's The defense attorney failed to object to these comments
22:48
Speaker 1: and also failed to consult an arson expert who could
22:51
Speaker 1: have rebutted the state's fire caused testimony. The court ruled
22:55
Speaker 1: that she was entitled to a new trial. So this
22:58
Speaker 1: is in twenty twenty. So she's released in twenty eighteen.
23:02
Speaker 1: Then on appeal they say, okay, she she can get
23:06
Speaker 1: a new trial. This is at twenty twenty. Her trial
23:08
Speaker 1: doesn't start until twenty twenty five.
23:10
Speaker 2: Right, And just to be clear, her being released I
23:13
Speaker 2: hadn't have to do with like being paroled or anything
23:15
Speaker 2: I had to do with like this trial that was
23:18
Speaker 2: thrown out.
23:19
Speaker 1: Yeah, right, And I don't know what the this is
23:22
Speaker 1: interesting too. I don't know what the parameters were of
23:25
Speaker 1: her release before her new trial.
23:27
Speaker 2: Like what I mean, is she like the house arrest
23:29
Speaker 2: or something.
23:30
Speaker 1: She allowed to travel freely? Probably, I'm sure they take
23:33
Speaker 1: her passport, and I mean she she could go to
23:35
Speaker 1: Costa Rica and get plastic surgery during that time period
23:38
Speaker 1: we have to make sure that she can be retried.
23:40
Speaker 2: She could take her sister's passport and try to go
23:42
Speaker 2: to Costa Rica exactly.
23:43
Speaker 1: So I wonder what the parameters were during the five
23:45
Speaker 1: years before she was tried again in twenty twenty five.
23:49
Speaker 1: All right, so now we get to the retrial.
23:51
Speaker 2: And her second seven years.
23:53
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know you're stuck on that seven years.
23:56
Speaker 2: Right, Well, it's kind of weird. It's like she had
23:58
Speaker 2: a break, yeah, and then she gets out, she gets
24:02
Speaker 2: to catch up with the world.
24:03
Speaker 1: Yeah, she has an intermission and.
24:04
Speaker 2: Then she gets to see It's like this is what
24:06
Speaker 2: you're missing. Yeah, and then you go back to jail. Yeah.
24:10
Speaker 1: So early twenty twenty five, after years of pre trial proceedings,
24:14
Speaker 1: Linda's retrial finally took place in Van Buren County. Prosecutors
24:19
Speaker 1: again presented the theory that she beat Todd, set the
24:23
Speaker 1: house on fire, and ran him over. You know, there
24:26
Speaker 1: was there's a witness that testified during her first trial.
24:30
Speaker 1: There were also jail house witnesses that testified, but it
24:34
Speaker 1: was hard to follow. I read very indepth details.
24:37
Speaker 2: About this, like what she said.
24:38
Speaker 1: That during that she admitted to things, but then then
24:42
Speaker 1: those you know, would be corroborated with other people that
24:45
Speaker 1: said that they were known liars. I don't know that
24:48
Speaker 1: jail Hell's.
24:48
Speaker 2: Testifying blood underneath the car and gasoline on his body, right, well,
24:56
Speaker 2: are trying to drive away and running him over? Right.
24:59
Speaker 1: One of her co work works testified against her, claiming
25:02
Speaker 1: that Linda said something to the effect that she needed
25:06
Speaker 1: to get home because she needed to get rid of
25:07
Speaker 1: some coffee cup that she had put drugs in that
25:10
Speaker 1: would sedate her husband, so she testified to that. But
25:13
Speaker 1: then you know, then you know, on defense on cross
25:16
Speaker 1: she also you know, has mental problems. And then her
25:20
Speaker 1: her you know, family testifies that she's a known liar
25:23
Speaker 1: and she and Linda didn't get along at work. They
25:24
Speaker 1: were best friends, but then they had a falling out.
25:27
Speaker 1: So you know, it's it's hard when you have conflicting
25:30
Speaker 1: testimony where someone testifies as something they hurt or no,
25:33
Speaker 1: and then someone else testifies that that person has mental
25:35
Speaker 1: illness and is a liar. And I can't imagine being
25:38
Speaker 1: a jury and trying to decipher through all the different
25:41
Speaker 1: But you're right, you just want to focus on the
25:43
Speaker 1: fact that he caught on fire, tried to run out
25:46
Speaker 1: of the house, and then got ran of her hanging fruit.
25:48
Speaker 2: Right, right, it's the blood all over the car. Right,
25:51
Speaker 2: Let's just stick with that coffee cup or whatever.
25:53
Speaker 1: Right. So then in April of twenty twenty five, which
25:57
Speaker 1: was one year ago, the second jury again found Lin
26:00
Speaker 1: the guilty on all charges.
26:02
Speaker 2: This is the same jury, they call the same people,
26:04
Speaker 2: and we got to read you this.
26:06
Speaker 1: I believe both juries were unanimous, and their decisions too.
26:08
Speaker 1: It wasn't like a majority. I think it was unanimous.
26:12
Speaker 1: Linda was sentenced for the second time to life in
26:14
Speaker 1: prison without the possibility of paroles.
26:16
Speaker 2: She had two life sentences, two life sentence.
26:19
Speaker 1: She had two life sentences right. She continues to maintain
26:23
Speaker 1: her innocence and has stated that her legal team is
26:25
Speaker 1: confident that this conviction will also be overturned. This is
26:28
Speaker 1: what the judge said to her.
26:29
Speaker 2: Judge number two.
26:30
Speaker 1: Judge number two, you lit your husband on fire and
26:33
Speaker 1: burned him alive. When he made it out of the house,
26:36
Speaker 1: and you had a chance to reconsider your actions, you
26:38
Speaker 1: instead doubled down and ran him over with your car.
26:42
Speaker 1: I cannot fathom the suffering he endured in his last
26:45
Speaker 1: moments of life. And I cannot fathom the damage you've
26:48
Speaker 1: inflicted on Todd's family, his mother, his siblings, and now
26:52
Speaker 1: your grown children, his grown children. But only a sentence
26:55
Speaker 1: of life without the possibility of parole can protect others
26:58
Speaker 1: from you and deter others from committing like conduct like conduct,
27:03
Speaker 1: And only a sentence of life without the possibility of
27:05
Speaker 1: parole can properly punish you for the heinous acts you've
27:09
Speaker 1: committed and burning your husband alive and leaving your children
27:12
Speaker 1: without that imprint forever. I thought that was pretty.
27:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, And then they said, and no fire science expert
27:18
Speaker 2: will alleviate you from your crimes, right, And I was like,
27:23
Speaker 2: what'd the fire science guy do? Yes, he was burned,
27:28
Speaker 2: Yes he had gasoline all over Rome, right, Well, she.
27:32
Speaker 1: Claims she She claims that there's because there's photos of
27:34
Speaker 1: other gas cans laying around her property. So she claims
27:37
Speaker 1: that they just had gas.
27:38
Speaker 2: It's just such a property. It's like, yeah, could there
27:42
Speaker 2: have been a fire science expert? Absolutely? Should there have been?
27:46
Speaker 2: Probably so, but like, was that really enough to like
27:51
Speaker 2: overturn it and retry it?
27:55
Speaker 1: Well? There was also other claims that you know, the
27:57
Speaker 1: prosecution was, you know, of line, and that the defense
28:01
Speaker 1: attorney should have objected and didn't. I guess everyone's entitled
28:04
Speaker 1: to the best defense that they possibly can have, and
28:08
Speaker 1: I guess they found that she was not. She did
28:10
Speaker 1: not receive, you know, someone that zealously advocated for her,
28:14
Speaker 1: and so they retried her, and.
28:16
Speaker 2: You know, it got her seven years out of jail.
28:19
Speaker 1: So you know, now what you deal with is the
28:22
Speaker 1: aftermath of all these children, because she has the two
28:23
Speaker 1: daughters from a first relationship, and then she has the
28:26
Speaker 1: two sons, and also then Corey, the adopted son. So
28:29
Speaker 1: the case has devastated and split the Sturmer family along
28:32
Speaker 1: sibling lines. This is really sad because now these siblings
28:35
Speaker 1: don't get along because they've got the You've got the
28:37
Speaker 1: two daughters that believe in their mother's nocence and her
28:41
Speaker 1: claiming that Todd was abusive and that he was violent,
28:45
Speaker 1: and then you've got the sons that are saying that's
28:49
Speaker 1: not true. All right, So how now these siblings are
28:52
Speaker 1: all broken?
28:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, well that's what judge said, right.
28:55
Speaker 1: So Linda's three sons, Trevor, Trenton, and her nephew Corey,
28:58
Speaker 1: who they raised, believe that she murdered their father and
29:01
Speaker 1: have testified against her at both trials. Corey testified that
29:05
Speaker 1: Linda's story changed multiple times and that she pressured the
29:07
Speaker 1: boys to lie to the insurance company about the state
29:10
Speaker 1: of the marriage. The sons have publicly stated that they
29:13
Speaker 1: no longer consider her their mother. However, Linda has the
29:17
Speaker 1: two daughters from an earlier relationship. This is Ashley and Brittany,
29:21
Speaker 1: and they both have remained convinced of Linda's innocence. Also,
29:26
Speaker 1: Todd is their stepdad, not their biological dad. Know longer Brittany,
29:31
Speaker 1: one of her daughters, became a driving force and seeking
29:34
Speaker 1: the retrial, even reaching out to fire investigator Rob Trinkle
29:38
Speaker 1: to push for a re examination of the fire evidence. Ashley,
29:42
Speaker 1: the other daughter, has spoken publicly about the personal cost
29:44
Speaker 1: of her stance, saying that she lost her brothers because
29:47
Speaker 1: she stood by her mother. The two sets of siblings
29:50
Speaker 1: reportedly no longer speak as of twenty twenty five. As
29:54
Speaker 1: of the twenty twenty five sentencing, Todd's surviving family members,
29:57
Speaker 1: including his sons, confronted Lynda in court, telling her she
30:01
Speaker 1: never let them say goodbye to their father. Yeah, so Linda's.
30:05
Speaker 2: She's knowingly like she sent them away, Yeah, knowing they
30:09
Speaker 2: would never see him again, or at least that was
30:12
Speaker 2: her plan and didn't have the decency. Yeah. Well, I
30:16
Speaker 2: mean she's a murderer, so of course she doesn't care
30:18
Speaker 2: about this stuff.
30:19
Speaker 1: So Linda is now in her early sixties and she
30:21
Speaker 1: is back in the Michigan Department of Corrections serving a
30:24
Speaker 1: life sentence. I don't know if there's ever any parole
30:27
Speaker 1: eligibility for her.
30:30
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know. Sh has seven years off SID.
30:33
Speaker 1: Seven years, so that's good enough for you.
30:35
Speaker 2: Huh. Yeah, that's a big deal. Can you imagine if
30:38
Speaker 2: I just gave you seven years free right now, like,
30:40
Speaker 2: no responsibility, don't worry about anything you did wrong, go
30:42
Speaker 2: out and enjoy yourself for seven years.
30:44
Speaker 1: Would you date a woman that went to prison for
30:46
Speaker 1: burning her husband alive and running over him with a van.
30:48
Speaker 2: No, but there's to each his own.
30:50
Speaker 1: There's probably some there's someone out there for her.
30:52
Speaker 2: That's why I said, so, I'm like, she's probably okay.
30:55
Speaker 1: Well that's my question. And if anyone out there listening knows.
30:58
Speaker 2: Was anyone her neighbor during those times.
31:01
Speaker 1: Linda was doing during those seven years? So if anyone
31:04
Speaker 1: has any information on that, please send it on.
31:07
Speaker 2: Like she starts to build a life and then it's like, nope,
31:09
Speaker 2: go back to prison. Well the question is do you
31:11
Speaker 2: she starts to binge watch like some series, she like
31:15
Speaker 2: creates some like hobby, or she like builds some Instagram
31:18
Speaker 2: following and that was then they yanked away.
31:21
Speaker 1: That's what you think of Instagram followings? And and she
31:24
Speaker 1: was if she was watching a Netflix.
31:26
Speaker 2: I don't think of her as being a responsible citizen,
31:29
Speaker 2: just contributing.
31:31
Speaker 1: You're watching Netflix and.
31:34
Speaker 2: Looking at her next crime.
31:36
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, well, thank you guys for listening till death.
31:39
Speaker 2: Do us way more sympathy for these killers.
31:41
Speaker 1: Every time I try to do a close because you
31:43
Speaker 1: always got these sympathies. I don't think killing for her.
31:47
Speaker 2: What do you think, like I'm too hard on them?
31:49
Speaker 2: No killers?
31:51
Speaker 1: Yes, well, at least you're not calling them crooks anymore.
31:53
Speaker 1: You should just call everybody killers. Everybody's a crook. Yes,
31:58
Speaker 1: Do you have any making marble updates?
32:00
Speaker 2: Well, her and Harry. Really, the word is that times
32:05
Speaker 2: are rough right now? Oh they're might splitting. Yeah. And
32:08
Speaker 2: then everyone's upset because she got paid to go out
32:10
Speaker 2: to Australia and then she had like some getaway like
32:14
Speaker 2: all these ladies could pay and go and apparently she
32:17
Speaker 2: only spoke to them for like twenty minutes, and so
32:20
Speaker 2: they're upset that they paid for this getaway with her,
32:23
Speaker 2: probably like a day spa type, yeah, you know environment
32:26
Speaker 2: and then she didn't really speak and she didn't want
32:28
Speaker 2: anything to do with them. Yeah, she is a horrible person.
32:30
Speaker 1: It's like the swimming with dolphins scam where you pay
32:33
Speaker 1: a bunch of money to like swim with dolphins.
32:35
Speaker 2: No, I don't touch the dolphins, but really don't.
32:37
Speaker 1: Stand in line and then you walk up and you
32:39
Speaker 1: get to put your you get to touch the top
32:41
Speaker 1: of its head, and they take a photo and then
32:42
Speaker 1: they send you on your way. There's no swimming with dolphins.
32:44
Speaker 2: No. They act like you're going to build a relationship
32:46
Speaker 2: with these dolphins and you're gonna hang out and have
32:48
Speaker 2: some memories.
32:48
Speaker 1: Okay, I will tell you the other night I went
32:51
Speaker 1: to an event and there was a man there that
32:54
Speaker 1: owns a chocolate company, and he was telling me that
32:57
Speaker 1: he's very good friends with Megan Markle and that he
33:00
Speaker 1: had just been at her house the other day and
33:02
Speaker 1: that she loves his chocolate, and he had nothing but
33:05
Speaker 1: kind and amazing things to say about her. So I
33:09
Speaker 1: wanted to launch into what my husband thinks, and then
33:12
Speaker 1: I thought, no, I'm just I just said, that's great.
33:15
Speaker 2: You suggest that he recommends you listen to podcasts.
33:18
Speaker 1: No, I did not, should I have?
33:21
Speaker 2: Did you know she's she's a piece of work?
33:24
Speaker 1: I'm sure as ever as ever? Okay, all right.
33:28
Speaker 2: Wickless candles, I mean the nerve. She's just basically selling
33:32
Speaker 2: sticks of wax.
33:34
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Shane. Megan markle Is reage me for Shane.
33:40
Speaker 1: All right, I'm going to end it now. Can I
33:41
Speaker 1: Do you have any final thought?
33:43
Speaker 2: No? Go?
33:43
Speaker 1: Okay, Thank you guys so much for listening till death
33:46
Speaker 1: does Part. If you have any cases out there that
33:48
Speaker 1: you would like to recommend, I love recommendations, so please
33:51
Speaker 1: be sure to find me on Instagram and send me
33:53
Speaker 1: a message. Also, if you have any feedback or comments,
33:56
Speaker 1: we love to hear it. Please be sure to follow
33:59
Speaker 1: up us on our own feed. It's Legally Brunette and
34:02
Speaker 1: you can listen to Illegally Brunette wherever you listen to
34:04
Speaker 1: that podcast, and please be sure to tell your friends
34:07
Speaker 1: and family. So thank you so much for listening. We
34:09
Speaker 1: appreciate you guys so much.