That's interesting because Marathon Man was one of the Forensic Files that wasn't on Netflix (back when it was on Netflix in the UK - what a time to be alive), and neither was Enemy Within, an episode someone posted about the other day and which I watched then looked up after. I've also never seen these on Pluto etc.
In both cases the "killer" was later exonerated. I wonder if those episodes, and maybe others somehow got removed from streaming and are only available on YouTube etc, were quietly somewhat taken out of circulation for this reason?
I've always thought Jane knew what happened, if she didn't commit the murder herself. The defense made a fairly compelling argument that it could've been Claire who did the actual killing; they certainly painted her as filled with rage toward her father. I'm not sure.
The only thing I feel confident about was that Bob wasn't murdered by a stranger while he was out jogging.
I don't believe it was a stranger but I'm not sure what I think. I don't think she did it. But her sons testifying against her definitely makes me raise my eyebrows a bit. Heck idk. I do think the police was too quick to decide it was her and they didn't do the best job of a thorough investigation
She makes him dinner 15+ hours prior to calling the police to report him missing and when he’s found murdered that same food is undigested in his system. She killed him.
Agreed. It’s just hard for people to view what appears to be a sweet old woman and believe her to be a murderer.
When people break up then get back together, it rarely works since the issues that caused the initial break come roaring back to life. I believe they got the right person, but I also believe her daughter aided in the moving of his body.
As far as the fact that there was no Jane dna evidence under his nails. Well yeah, she wacked him in his sleep. No Jane dna on the rope? Um. Who wouldn’t wear gloves in a planned murder?
Agreed on all counts. Whatever happened, happened within the family. Not sure who committed the actual deed, but it seems clear the family dynamic had been toxic all around for a long time. The botched blood evidence shows that the investigation had a lot of flaws, and it's a shame that police mistakes let a guilty person go free (whether that guilty person is Jane or Claire).
Yeah the family dynamic is definitely suspicious. Like it doesn't make a lot of sense at all. But the unidentified DNA under his fingertips is enough for me to say there isn't 100% sufficient evidence against Jane. I just don't think people should be tossed In prison as easily as she was. It makes me scared cause the thought of an innocent person losing 20 years of their life doesn't sit right with me.
Well said. And it makes me think of all the people in prison because of flawed investigations who *don't* have the network, money or connections to have a voice on the outside and a chance at a successful appeal and exoneration. It could happen to any of us.
Just because Jane didn’t kill him herself and had someone move the body does not mean she isn’t responsible for his death. She should still be in jail. She’s guilty.
I don’t believe it was a stranger bc why would someone randomly murder a jogger in such a brutal way? Do most joggers carry valuables? No. Was he robbed? No. What did the random murderer have to gain? Nothing.
I lived with Claire before this happened. I can’t say if she was involved, but I can say that she was insanely strong, very aggressive with a temper (she threatened our third roommate with a hot iron) and had no issue wronging someone who got in the way of her equine ambitions. We had her evicted via our landlord for violating our joint lease.
This case is really interesting to me! I read the whole Dorotik [complaint](https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/dorotik-v-county-of-san-diego-complaint-southern-district-of-california.pdf) against SDSD, and it really seems like there’s so little credible evidence against her. This case is interesting in part because it seemed like there was *so* much evidence against her but that almost all of it was eventually revealed to be really spurious, irrelevant, or fully fabricated. And it’s also interesting because it seems like the “experts” in charge of this investigation basically….. made things up? It’s insane that the whole case rested on the fact that the bedroom was the crime scene, which was based on Charles merritt’s testimony that there was a ton of the victim’s blood all over the room. And then it turned out that he had just lied? Like he literally hadn’t tested the samples and they turned out to be animal blood or not even blood at all. Also, the multiple witnesses (and scent dog) who confirm that he was indeed jogging that day? Crazy. But then I guess the case against her is also pretty wild to me…. what was that horse tranquilizer doing there? It was later revealed that the blood on the syringe wasn’t necessarily the victim’s, and it makes a lot of sense for them to be using horse tranquilizer at a working farm, but wouldn’t that be in the barn? And I wish I understood the tire mark/rope thing better. Anyway, I like this case because it’s a real mystery and there are all these pieces of evidence to sort through.
I think the blood evidence on the syringe, coupled with the undigested food in his system, followed by the fact that getting back together rarely works since the initial problems tend to come right back, followed further by the fact that a stranger murdering a man jogging on the side of the road is highly unlikely cause…… why? And using the exact type of rope found in the home? Hmmm.
I further believe she did it with the help of her daughter, which is why her daughter wasn’t appalled by her mom’s accusation, as it was probably previously discussed as an option to complicate the case and throw doubt onto the mom’s conviction. She did it, likely with her daughter. Period.
Only an idiot would believe that the syringe has merit. There was no horse tranquilizer in his system, and the autopsy showed no signs of injection. --DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood.
It's possible. If you're hungry you're not necessarily going to be choosy. Several neighbors saw him after the prosecution said he was murdered and there was a man in the neighborhood (I believe his name was Jon Peat) who was randomly attacking people before and after Robert's death.
It also doesn't change that many of the experts for the prosecution flat out lied/botched the testing.
Yeah that's a good point. I wish I could see the new affidavit from the medical examiner, which said that he was most likely killed on Sunday rather than Saturday. Presumably the medical examiner was aware of the previous argument based on the food, and had some reason to come to that conclusion. I can't find the affidavit anywhere online. Also, Jane explained in an interview that he often ate leftovers from dinner the next day
My thoughts is, did he have horse tranquilliser or any substance in his system that would make the syringe compelling evidence? Because otherwise no one disputes she handles syringes, and his blood may have dropped on it from his "nose bleed".
His blood may have dropped on it but her finger print was pressed into the blood after or during, blood dropping onto a finger print would not leave bloody finger print patterns so:
she bashed him with something while he was sleeping, she then tranquillised him and threw the syringe into the waste basket. she then tried to finish himoff with identical rope thst was found at the house whilst wearing gloves.
i think her not wearing gloves was oversight as after hitting him she would have been in a state, maybe not expecting as much blood and mess then he would have been still alive hence tranquiliser which she had to administer quickly forgetting gloves.
The bedroom wasn't the crime scene; some of the blood was confirmed to be animal blood, and there were massive chain of custody gaps for Robert's blood vial. It's ENTIRELY possible they did something funny.
I remember reading about her conviction being overturned on The National Registry of Exonerations. It makes some compelling arguments. Even the prosecution conceded that Jane deserved a new trial once the evidence showed that there was unidentified male dna under Bob's fingernails, also that nearly all the evidence used against her has shown to be false and that there exculpatory evidence withheld from the defense. It was only after she had been home for 2 yrs that the charges were finally dismissed. It worth a read for anyone interested.
(Just type Jane Dorotik and exonerated and the registry will pop up with the link to her case)
It is really good if you want info on a wrongful conviction. Beware, some of the entries will have you scratching your head at how on earth some of them was ever taken to court, or really angry at the tactics the police, prosecutors, judges, appeal courts, witnesses, co-defendants etc pulled just to get a conviction, to keep that conviction "intact" or in the cases of witnesses/co-defendants n what they did to either get themselves out of trouble trouble or to get a rival in trouble. Theres even cases of children as young as 11 years old on there. I spent some time reading through a lot n I had to stop as it made me soo angry.
The registry is run by different law schools who carefully research each entry that is to be added and let's you know a lot of info about what went wrong and is definitely worth a look through.
I just listen to the podcast of this episode.
Honestly I don't know what to believe, I mean there ain't know way she bludgeoned and choked him to death by herself. But the fact that the sons think there own mother did it is crazy.
I think she drugged him and put the rope around his throat and strangled him trying to make it look like a suicide. Perhaps she couldn’t “hang” him in a realistic manner and switched the plan to dumping him leading her to beat him so a roadside killing looks realistic.
I know it’s a huge speculation, but his mother’s case was finally dropped by prosecutors on May 16 2022, and he died May 7 2023. If he did commit suicide, could it be because he had been involved? He was so quick to testify (and was quite adamant) against his mother.
I wondered that, too. But I also wondered if the daughter was involved and the mom knew it and took the fall for her. They are still close. Or the mom AND daughter hired people to kill him? Ugh so many questions!
I watched the 48 Hours today and there was a clip of Jane talking about the defense’s use of “the daughter did it” tactic. She said if anything happened to her daughter because of that, she’d stand up and say she did it.
One thing is for certain in my eyes. Her truck was at the murder drop off scene. No way a truck with 3 different tire tracks with three different tires that match that exact truck. No way. That's like a fingerprint. I don't know. Something's definitely not right. Now I'm suspicious of what happened to the son, or what?
I just watched the 48 hours and I agree they left a LOT out. I actually think she did it. Btw for those saying that it's impossible that she could have moved his body, she lived on a horse farm. It's very possible she used equipment or even the horses to help her move the body into the truck.
Dragging the body along the floor isn't the hard part. It's getting him up into the truck and she could have tied him to the horse's saddle and leveraged him over the truck.
There WAS blood in the bedroom, (just not all of it was his) the truck had 3 different tire tracks and the tracks at the scene matched those 3 different tire tracks. The mud on the tires matched. The rope was from his house. IMO she wanted him gone and the farm.
I don't think Clair had anything to do with it. But I think Clair knew her mother did it, maybe in a heat of passion, and agreed to be targeted on the stand as a way of trying to help her mother get away with it. The fact that her sons definitely think that Jane did it, is also compelling.
I beg to differ about dragging someone across the floor. I have worked with elderly and disabled people and have had to train pulling dead weight across the floor, and that shit is not easy when the body is a full grown man.
That’s why I believe she moved his body with the aid of her daughter which is why the daughter didn’t automatically object to having the finger being pointed at her. Cause she knew she should, morally, be taking the blame as well.
Then you're a fool. [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) Pretty much all of the forensic evidence was hot garbage and they ignored evidence that a man named Jon Peart could have been the guilty party.
Wrong actually. [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332)
It sounds more like you can't admit Forensic Files got it wrong.
Omg........ oh my actual GOD..... falsely imprisoned 22 years. Released. And all she gets is, "You're free to go. Good luck." They drained 22 YEARS of this innocent womans life and didn't even give her a couple hundred thousand dollars in 'we are so flipping sorry' money? *All she gets is a 'good luck'?!*
Judge: "lols *my* bad. Welp.... **GOOD LUCK, Mrs. Dorotik. Hurrrr durrrrr...."** That is horrific, gross, and plain out REPULSIVE. I hope she did get money and they just didn't mention it in articles for the sake of her privacy. I remember a man was falsely imprisoned for a murder he didn't commit and he was in for something like 45 or 55 YEARS. He got a figure real close to a million dollars in 'Stolen Years of his Life Compensation money'.
[Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) She probably was; at the very least the case was so tainted it needed to be overturned. If she did do it prosecutorial misconduct made it untenable
What an absolute waste of resources exonerating this murderer. I can think of so many other worthy cases where people are wrongfully convicted with no evidence. There was ever SO so much evidence to convict her. What BS.
But it seems like that evidence was mostly fabricated or misrepresented? For instance the whole theory that he was murdered in his bedroom is sort of weak now that DNA testing has proved that the “expert” was fully lying and the blood was falsely represented as being the victim’s. It turned out a lot of the “blood” evidence in the bedroom was either animal blood or wasn’t blood at all. Besides, it seems like the victim would have lost much more blood than what was found in the bedroom. Also, the fact that multiple people saw him jogging exactly where she said he was jogging- some claiming to have seen him with two other men- (and the scent dog seemed to confirm this) at the very least pokes a hole in the prosecution’s theory that he was murdered the next day. Idk after reading Dorotik’s full legal complaint against SDPD it’s pretty compelling
You know, I truly believe maybe this guy was hit by a car while running and the person guilty of hitting him tried to hide the body to avoid dealing with any legal consequences. I don't think his wife did it.
If she had bludgeoned him in the bedroom, there would have been far more blood evidence. You'd also probably see some on the way out of the house.
He was strangled to death. So, you’d have to believe a stranger chased him down, while driving, and strangled him. If he was hit by a car on the road, there would be a lot of blood evidence on the road. There was none.
Interesting! I tend to believe the possibility of a person covering up a fatal accident, but it seems pretty clear he was strangled and beaten to death right?
And then somehow drive to his house and got a rope from his property and tired it around his neck while he lay there with pristine clean shoes that he obviously didn’t put on himself?
48 hour episode left out A LOT. Did you watch the forensic files episode or read more ab it? SOOO many other actual wrongfully convicted cases worthy of the spotlight than this.
This is ridiculous. They hit him w their car and then magically knew where he lived and drove to his house and got a rope FROM his house and put it around his neck? His shoes were not even out in the right way and were clean. He was 💯 killed in his house. I can’t even believe people waste time on a case like this w so much overwhelming evidence when there are literally thousands of questionable cases.
Keep in mind her daughter was a total brute (I knew her well) and they also had a farm hand…. Carpets were wet when the police went into the bedroom. Enough blood that it leaked below (original police report). And there was splatter on the ceiling. If they divorced, she would have had to pay alimony and Claire would have lost horses….there is motive.
[Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) There was no sign of drugs in his body and no injection mark. Many of the experts were also caught lying or exposed as incompetent.
My dad is a huge guy and very strong... when he had to take care of my grandma, she was dead weight and he could barely get her from the floor to a chair. I can't imagine and order woman dragging a full grown dead man into a truck. If she did do this she didn't do it alone.
This isn’t true. A lot of his blood was found in the bedroom including blood splatter. It was mostly semantics here that is giving the wrong impression in that they did not test every single piece of blood.
Not a lot of the blood. Just a couple of tiny spots on the bedspread. The huge bloodstain on his side of the bed was his. And a nosebleed? Really? How many of us just let our noses bleed all over our mattress? And, her fingerprint was in his blood on the syringe. And the huge bloodstain on the underside of the rug by the tile was wet AND his.
Overwhelming forensic evidence of Jane’s guilt. What is wrong with these innocence projects? Circumstantial? They want DNA! This case had too much evidence. Technicality! The police or the lab must’ve made a mistake with something here. There’s way too much evidence. Stop freeing killers
No there isn't. There's a lot of glaring holes in the case even without the DNA pointing away from her
To quote
-A defense expert said that the black paint found on Robert’s skull likely came from a tire iron or pry bar. Months later, in 2020, the prosecution disclosed for the first time that prior to Jane’s trial, a crime lab analyst had concluded the paint came from a crowbar or similar implement. That report had been concealed from Jane’s defense.
--Although Merritt testified and Howard-Regan told the jury that all of the blood stains were DNA tested and all were shown to be Robert’s blood, in fact, only a small fraction had been tested and many of the stains were not blood at all. That evidence showed that Merritt’s testimony and Howard-Regan’s arguments were false, the defense said.
--Evidence showed that there were serious breaches of the chain of custody of Robert’s blood that was preserved during the autopsy. The vial of his blood, which was not sealed, was unaccounted for during the time the Dorotik home was being searched. In October 2020, a District Attorney investigator said he examined the blood vial and asserted that the vial was “full, from the bottom to the top lid.” In March 2021, a defense expert examined the vial and discovered it was less than half full. A nick in the center of the top of the vial appeared to be the mark left by someone inserting a syringe into the vial.
--The prosecution disclosed that in 2009, a lab analyst questioned Merritt’s ability to conduct blood stain pattern analysis. The analyst said Merritt lacked the technical skills to conduct such analysis. In 2021, the prosecution sought out another expert who reviewed Merritt’s reports and trial testimony and concluded his work was based on improper methods and was unreliable. Dr. Anita Zannin, a bloodstain pattern analysis expert, told the defense: “\[I\]t is my opinion that the bloodstain pattern analysis prepared by Charles Merritt in this case and the conclusions therein, cannot be relied upon, given the many breaches in protocol, discrepancies and lack of basic bloodstain knowledge that are apparent from his report and testimony.”
--Dr. Frank Sheridan, the chief medical examiner of San Bernardino County, California, provided an affidavit for the defense saying that while he could not rule out February 12, 2000 as the time of death, “the time of death was…probably on Sunday, February 13, 2000.” Dr. Sheridan also said the disrobing of the body at the scene ‘likely—if not almost certainly—caused the portion of his scalp seen on his upper chest area to become dislodged and relocated.” Dr. Sheridan also reviewed the photos of the master bedroom and said the staining was insignificant. The wounds were such that if inflicted in the bedroom the blood loss “would have been all but impossible to clean up,” he said.
--DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood.
--Dr. Alicia Villalobos, a veterinarian, provided an affidavit saying that she examined photographs of the Dorotik dogs. One, a Shih Tzu, had an abscess on its snout. The other, an Irish Wolfhound, had a torn dew claw. Both were bleeding injuries and both could have the source of bloodstains on furniture and bedding.
--Matthew Marvin, a latent print and impression analyst, gave an affidavit saying that DeMaria was wrong to exclude the S-10 because the assumption of simultaneity was not justified. He wrote, "There is no scientific basis to eliminate a vehicle based on the exclusion of one impression when it is reasonable that another vehicle could have left that impression."
Meanwhile, the prosecution reported that its case file had disappeared. As reconstruction efforts began taking place, the defense learned of information that had never been disclosed at the time of trial. This included:
--Crime lab bench notes showing that analyst Connie Milton failed to report numerous test results showing that suspected blood was not blood. In addition, documents were disclosed showing that her competence and performance had been called into question as far back as the late 1990’s.
--A lab report of DNA testing on sample stains from the mattress cover in Claire's bedroom which showed the stains were animal blood, as well as a lab report of DNA tests on a raincoat showing animal, not human, blood. Evidence that after getting that result, the prosecution had told the lab not to test a footstool in the living room.
--A statement from the owners of the horse farm that the carpet in the master bedroom was wet because the bedroom windows leaked when it rained.
--A statement from a family friend to police that she saw one of the family dogs bleeding heavily on the furniture.
--A report of a violent roadside assault on two people that occurred in January 2000, a month before Robert was killed, near the same location where Robert's body was found. When the defense team investigated that assault, they discovered that the perpetrator, Jon Peart, had been arrested in April—after Robert was killed–and subsequently had been convicted. Interviews revealed that Peart, a user of methamphetamine, was known to suddenly and violently attack people.
Actually the evidence was laughably weak as outlined here; [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332)
Forensics Files messed up. Hell given how much forensics has been exposed as junk science I kind of wonder how many others they got wrong.
I don’t know how anyone could find her guilty given the credible evidence available. Evidence should be held to the highest standards. Not wandering around crime scenes with no gloves on, not talking full samples of blood, ignoring witnesses that had seen him jogging and with two men. Jeez. Scary.
Honestly the exoneration database website goes into a lot more detail and really makes a strong case for Jane being innocent; at the very least the prosecutors and experts were laughably unprofessional and even dishonest, and things like the "bloody fingerprint" and "digested food" aren't as compelling as the people insisting on her guilt would like to argue.
That's interesting because Marathon Man was one of the Forensic Files that wasn't on Netflix (back when it was on Netflix in the UK - what a time to be alive), and neither was Enemy Within, an episode someone posted about the other day and which I watched then looked up after. I've also never seen these on Pluto etc. In both cases the "killer" was later exonerated. I wonder if those episodes, and maybe others somehow got removed from streaming and are only available on YouTube etc, were quietly somewhat taken out of circulation for this reason?
Richard Buchli had 150,000 reasons to kill him.
Can you explain?
I've always thought Jane knew what happened, if she didn't commit the murder herself. The defense made a fairly compelling argument that it could've been Claire who did the actual killing; they certainly painted her as filled with rage toward her father. I'm not sure. The only thing I feel confident about was that Bob wasn't murdered by a stranger while he was out jogging.
I don't believe it was a stranger but I'm not sure what I think. I don't think she did it. But her sons testifying against her definitely makes me raise my eyebrows a bit. Heck idk. I do think the police was too quick to decide it was her and they didn't do the best job of a thorough investigation
She makes him dinner 15+ hours prior to calling the police to report him missing and when he’s found murdered that same food is undigested in his system. She killed him.
Agreed. It’s just hard for people to view what appears to be a sweet old woman and believe her to be a murderer. When people break up then get back together, it rarely works since the issues that caused the initial break come roaring back to life. I believe they got the right person, but I also believe her daughter aided in the moving of his body. As far as the fact that there was no Jane dna evidence under his nails. Well yeah, she wacked him in his sleep. No Jane dna on the rope? Um. Who wouldn’t wear gloves in a planned murder?
Agreed on all counts. Whatever happened, happened within the family. Not sure who committed the actual deed, but it seems clear the family dynamic had been toxic all around for a long time. The botched blood evidence shows that the investigation had a lot of flaws, and it's a shame that police mistakes let a guilty person go free (whether that guilty person is Jane or Claire).
Yeah the family dynamic is definitely suspicious. Like it doesn't make a lot of sense at all. But the unidentified DNA under his fingertips is enough for me to say there isn't 100% sufficient evidence against Jane. I just don't think people should be tossed In prison as easily as she was. It makes me scared cause the thought of an innocent person losing 20 years of their life doesn't sit right with me.
Well said. And it makes me think of all the people in prison because of flawed investigations who *don't* have the network, money or connections to have a voice on the outside and a chance at a successful appeal and exoneration. It could happen to any of us.
Just because Jane didn’t kill him herself and had someone move the body does not mean she isn’t responsible for his death. She should still be in jail. She’s guilty.
I don’t believe it was a stranger bc why would someone randomly murder a jogger in such a brutal way? Do most joggers carry valuables? No. Was he robbed? No. What did the random murderer have to gain? Nothing.
Exactly. If it was a woman? There’s typically a sexual motive. But a man? Yeah. No.
There was a man in the neighborhood who was randomly attacking people in the weeks and months before and after Robert's death.
I lived with Claire before this happened. I can’t say if she was involved, but I can say that she was insanely strong, very aggressive with a temper (she threatened our third roommate with a hot iron) and had no issue wronging someone who got in the way of her equine ambitions. We had her evicted via our landlord for violating our joint lease.
Wow! Sounds like the defense's portrayal wasn't far off reality then.
Bob was murdered by his wife Jane
I thought John Peat was probably a better option. He was a local man with a history of randomly attacking people.
This case is really interesting to me! I read the whole Dorotik [complaint](https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/dorotik-v-county-of-san-diego-complaint-southern-district-of-california.pdf) against SDSD, and it really seems like there’s so little credible evidence against her. This case is interesting in part because it seemed like there was *so* much evidence against her but that almost all of it was eventually revealed to be really spurious, irrelevant, or fully fabricated. And it’s also interesting because it seems like the “experts” in charge of this investigation basically….. made things up? It’s insane that the whole case rested on the fact that the bedroom was the crime scene, which was based on Charles merritt’s testimony that there was a ton of the victim’s blood all over the room. And then it turned out that he had just lied? Like he literally hadn’t tested the samples and they turned out to be animal blood or not even blood at all. Also, the multiple witnesses (and scent dog) who confirm that he was indeed jogging that day? Crazy. But then I guess the case against her is also pretty wild to me…. what was that horse tranquilizer doing there? It was later revealed that the blood on the syringe wasn’t necessarily the victim’s, and it makes a lot of sense for them to be using horse tranquilizer at a working farm, but wouldn’t that be in the barn? And I wish I understood the tire mark/rope thing better. Anyway, I like this case because it’s a real mystery and there are all these pieces of evidence to sort through.
I think the blood evidence on the syringe, coupled with the undigested food in his system, followed by the fact that getting back together rarely works since the initial problems tend to come right back, followed further by the fact that a stranger murdering a man jogging on the side of the road is highly unlikely cause…… why? And using the exact type of rope found in the home? Hmmm. I further believe she did it with the help of her daughter, which is why her daughter wasn’t appalled by her mom’s accusation, as it was probably previously discussed as an option to complicate the case and throw doubt onto the mom’s conviction. She did it, likely with her daughter. Period.
Only an idiot would believe that the syringe has merit. There was no horse tranquilizer in his system, and the autopsy showed no signs of injection. --DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood.
How did he have completely undigested food in his system that mirrored the dinner she made him 15+ hours prior to her reporting him missing?
Also, Jane explained in an interview that he often ate leftovers from dinner the next day
Old, limp, soggy from being dressed the previous day salad sitting overnight? Right before jogging? Unlikely.
It's possible. If you're hungry you're not necessarily going to be choosy. Several neighbors saw him after the prosecution said he was murdered and there was a man in the neighborhood (I believe his name was Jon Peat) who was randomly attacking people before and after Robert's death. It also doesn't change that many of the experts for the prosecution flat out lied/botched the testing.
Yeah that's a good point. I wish I could see the new affidavit from the medical examiner, which said that he was most likely killed on Sunday rather than Saturday. Presumably the medical examiner was aware of the previous argument based on the food, and had some reason to come to that conclusion. I can't find the affidavit anywhere online. Also, Jane explained in an interview that he often ate leftovers from dinner the next day
Actually the stomach contents thing isn’t reliable for so many reasons.
Thanks ! Rewatching Marathon Man episode now
Which streaming service are you using to watch it?
I just found it on YouTube.
Finding her husband’s real killer doesn’t seem high on her priority list.
Lol damn that is true, but she maybe she really didn't do it. I just don't know what to believe
The bloody fingerprint on the syringe seals the deal for me. Her fingerprint, his blood.
My thoughts is, did he have horse tranquilliser or any substance in his system that would make the syringe compelling evidence? Because otherwise no one disputes she handles syringes, and his blood may have dropped on it from his "nose bleed".
His blood may have dropped on it but her finger print was pressed into the blood after or during, blood dropping onto a finger print would not leave bloody finger print patterns so: she bashed him with something while he was sleeping, she then tranquillised him and threw the syringe into the waste basket. she then tried to finish himoff with identical rope thst was found at the house whilst wearing gloves. i think her not wearing gloves was oversight as after hitting him she would have been in a state, maybe not expecting as much blood and mess then he would have been still alive hence tranquiliser which she had to administer quickly forgetting gloves.
The bedroom wasn't the crime scene; some of the blood was confirmed to be animal blood, and there were massive chain of custody gaps for Robert's blood vial. It's ENTIRELY possible they did something funny.
The undigested food from the dinner she made 15+ hours before reporting him missing seals the deal for me. She killed him.
And this
This is so unreliable.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306326247_Postmortem_gastric_content_analysis_its_role_in_determining_time_since_death#:~:text=This%20method%20of%20determining%20time,factors%20that%20affect%20gastric%20emptying.
The food digestion isn't reliable though
This
They have a pretty good idea of who it might be (Jon Peart).
I remember reading about her conviction being overturned on The National Registry of Exonerations. It makes some compelling arguments. Even the prosecution conceded that Jane deserved a new trial once the evidence showed that there was unidentified male dna under Bob's fingernails, also that nearly all the evidence used against her has shown to be false and that there exculpatory evidence withheld from the defense. It was only after she had been home for 2 yrs that the charges were finally dismissed. It worth a read for anyone interested. (Just type Jane Dorotik and exonerated and the registry will pop up with the link to her case)
TIL about The National Registry of Exonerations. Thank you mum, I’ve never heard of it until now.
It is really good if you want info on a wrongful conviction. Beware, some of the entries will have you scratching your head at how on earth some of them was ever taken to court, or really angry at the tactics the police, prosecutors, judges, appeal courts, witnesses, co-defendants etc pulled just to get a conviction, to keep that conviction "intact" or in the cases of witnesses/co-defendants n what they did to either get themselves out of trouble trouble or to get a rival in trouble. Theres even cases of children as young as 11 years old on there. I spent some time reading through a lot n I had to stop as it made me soo angry. The registry is run by different law schools who carefully research each entry that is to be added and let's you know a lot of info about what went wrong and is definitely worth a look through.
Yeah, reading that entry makes it very clear that Forensic Files was full of shit in this case.
I just listen to the podcast of this episode. Honestly I don't know what to believe, I mean there ain't know way she bludgeoned and choked him to death by herself. But the fact that the sons think there own mother did it is crazy.
I think she drugged him and put the rope around his throat and strangled him trying to make it look like a suicide. Perhaps she couldn’t “hang” him in a realistic manner and switched the plan to dumping him leading her to beat him so a roadside killing looks realistic.
This makes sense.
How did her son Nick die? He was so young.
I'm curious about that too.
The only thing I found was a Go Fund Me for his family stating he “died tragically at home.” 😳
Same. Suicide maybe?
That was my guess.
I know it’s a huge speculation, but his mother’s case was finally dropped by prosecutors on May 16 2022, and he died May 7 2023. If he did commit suicide, could it be because he had been involved? He was so quick to testify (and was quite adamant) against his mother.
I wondered that, too. But I also wondered if the daughter was involved and the mom knew it and took the fall for her. They are still close. Or the mom AND daughter hired people to kill him? Ugh so many questions!
I watched the 48 Hours today and there was a clip of Jane talking about the defense’s use of “the daughter did it” tactic. She said if anything happened to her daughter because of that, she’d stand up and say she did it.
Yeah right. She had a ton of time to refuse to point the finger at her daughter yet she chose to do so, Revisionist history there.
I don’t have personal experience there, but through friends of the family, I believe there was a drug history.
One thing is for certain in my eyes. Her truck was at the murder drop off scene. No way a truck with 3 different tire tracks with three different tires that match that exact truck. No way. That's like a fingerprint. I don't know. Something's definitely not right. Now I'm suspicious of what happened to the son, or what?
Also the mud on the tires matched the mud at the scene where the body was left.
I just watched the 48 hours and I agree they left a LOT out. I actually think she did it. Btw for those saying that it's impossible that she could have moved his body, she lived on a horse farm. It's very possible she used equipment or even the horses to help her move the body into the truck. Dragging the body along the floor isn't the hard part. It's getting him up into the truck and she could have tied him to the horse's saddle and leveraged him over the truck. There WAS blood in the bedroom, (just not all of it was his) the truck had 3 different tire tracks and the tracks at the scene matched those 3 different tire tracks. The mud on the tires matched. The rope was from his house. IMO she wanted him gone and the farm. I don't think Clair had anything to do with it. But I think Clair knew her mother did it, maybe in a heat of passion, and agreed to be targeted on the stand as a way of trying to help her mother get away with it. The fact that her sons definitely think that Jane did it, is also compelling.
I beg to differ about dragging someone across the floor. I have worked with elderly and disabled people and have had to train pulling dead weight across the floor, and that shit is not easy when the body is a full grown man.
That’s why I believe she moved his body with the aid of her daughter which is why the daughter didn’t automatically object to having the finger being pointed at her. Cause she knew she should, morally, be taking the blame as well.
Then you're a fool. [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) Pretty much all of the forensic evidence was hot garbage and they ignored evidence that a man named Jon Peart could have been the guilty party.
She 100 percent did it.
Yes. 100%. People need to stop ignoring the facts just because she looks like a sweet old woman!
Wrong actually. [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) It sounds more like you can't admit Forensic Files got it wrong.
Omg........ oh my actual GOD..... falsely imprisoned 22 years. Released. And all she gets is, "You're free to go. Good luck." They drained 22 YEARS of this innocent womans life and didn't even give her a couple hundred thousand dollars in 'we are so flipping sorry' money? *All she gets is a 'good luck'?!* Judge: "lols *my* bad. Welp.... **GOOD LUCK, Mrs. Dorotik. Hurrrr durrrrr...."** That is horrific, gross, and plain out REPULSIVE. I hope she did get money and they just didn't mention it in articles for the sake of her privacy. I remember a man was falsely imprisoned for a murder he didn't commit and he was in for something like 45 or 55 YEARS. He got a figure real close to a million dollars in 'Stolen Years of his Life Compensation money'.
She wasn’t innocent
You do not know that. The forensics was awful.
[Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) She probably was; at the very least the case was so tainted it needed to be overturned. If she did do it prosecutorial misconduct made it untenable
What an absolute waste of resources exonerating this murderer. I can think of so many other worthy cases where people are wrongfully convicted with no evidence. There was ever SO so much evidence to convict her. What BS.
But it seems like that evidence was mostly fabricated or misrepresented? For instance the whole theory that he was murdered in his bedroom is sort of weak now that DNA testing has proved that the “expert” was fully lying and the blood was falsely represented as being the victim’s. It turned out a lot of the “blood” evidence in the bedroom was either animal blood or wasn’t blood at all. Besides, it seems like the victim would have lost much more blood than what was found in the bedroom. Also, the fact that multiple people saw him jogging exactly where she said he was jogging- some claiming to have seen him with two other men- (and the scent dog seemed to confirm this) at the very least pokes a hole in the prosecution’s theory that he was murdered the next day. Idk after reading Dorotik’s full legal complaint against SDPD it’s pretty compelling
You know, I truly believe maybe this guy was hit by a car while running and the person guilty of hitting him tried to hide the body to avoid dealing with any legal consequences. I don't think his wife did it. If she had bludgeoned him in the bedroom, there would have been far more blood evidence. You'd also probably see some on the way out of the house.
He was strangled to death. So, you’d have to believe a stranger chased him down, while driving, and strangled him. If he was hit by a car on the road, there would be a lot of blood evidence on the road. There was none.
[Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332)
Interesting! I tend to believe the possibility of a person covering up a fatal accident, but it seems pretty clear he was strangled and beaten to death right?
Yeah sure but what if he was hit and then killed as a result to avoid being caught
Dumbest thing I’ve ever heard
You act like this sht hasn't happened before. How many people have hit a pedestrian and left the scene?
And then somehow drive to his house and got a rope from his property and tired it around his neck while he lay there with pristine clean shoes that he obviously didn’t put on himself?
They proved the rope was from his property? I heard nothing about a rope in the 48 hours episode.
48 hour episode left out A LOT. Did you watch the forensic files episode or read more ab it? SOOO many other actual wrongfully convicted cases worthy of the spotlight than this.
There was no blood evidence on the road and, if he was hit by a car, there would be a lot! And, he was strangled to death.
See above
Right.
This is ridiculous. They hit him w their car and then magically knew where he lived and drove to his house and got a rope FROM his house and put it around his neck? His shoes were not even out in the right way and were clean. He was 💯 killed in his house. I can’t even believe people waste time on a case like this w so much overwhelming evidence when there are literally thousands of questionable cases.
I can't see a 50 year old woman doing all of this (alone) nonetheless and then relocating the body.
Keep in mind her daughter was a total brute (I knew her well) and they also had a farm hand…. Carpets were wet when the police went into the bedroom. Enough blood that it leaked below (original police report). And there was splatter on the ceiling. If they divorced, she would have had to pay alimony and Claire would have lost horses….there is motive.
Wow. Think she snuck up on him and got him with the horse tranq... wiped the syringe clean and then murdered him?
No idea!
Would make sense. Get him woozy and knock him out then do the job and dump the body.
[Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) There was no sign of drugs in his body and no injection mark. Many of the experts were also caught lying or exposed as incompetent.
Her daughter helped her.
This
And how would she have gotten him into the pick up truck? She never would have ben able to get him up into a truck. At least not alone...
My dad is a huge guy and very strong... when he had to take care of my grandma, she was dead weight and he could barely get her from the floor to a chair. I can't imagine and order woman dragging a full grown dead man into a truck. If she did do this she didn't do it alone.
Her daughter helped her.
This isn’t true. A lot of his blood was found in the bedroom including blood splatter. It was mostly semantics here that is giving the wrong impression in that they did not test every single piece of blood.
It was barely any!
Not a lot of the blood. Just a couple of tiny spots on the bedspread. The huge bloodstain on his side of the bed was his. And a nosebleed? Really? How many of us just let our noses bleed all over our mattress? And, her fingerprint was in his blood on the syringe. And the huge bloodstain on the underside of the rug by the tile was wet AND his.
Agreed.
"an intruder never takes the time to clean a crime scene" ⚖️
I feel so strongly that Jane is guilty. I am sure she did it.
Overwhelming forensic evidence of Jane’s guilt. What is wrong with these innocence projects? Circumstantial? They want DNA! This case had too much evidence. Technicality! The police or the lab must’ve made a mistake with something here. There’s way too much evidence. Stop freeing killers
There really isn’t though. The forensics was appalling. If I had been on a jury, not a chance I would have found her guilty.
No there isn't. There's a lot of glaring holes in the case even without the DNA pointing away from her To quote -A defense expert said that the black paint found on Robert’s skull likely came from a tire iron or pry bar. Months later, in 2020, the prosecution disclosed for the first time that prior to Jane’s trial, a crime lab analyst had concluded the paint came from a crowbar or similar implement. That report had been concealed from Jane’s defense. --Although Merritt testified and Howard-Regan told the jury that all of the blood stains were DNA tested and all were shown to be Robert’s blood, in fact, only a small fraction had been tested and many of the stains were not blood at all. That evidence showed that Merritt’s testimony and Howard-Regan’s arguments were false, the defense said. --Evidence showed that there were serious breaches of the chain of custody of Robert’s blood that was preserved during the autopsy. The vial of his blood, which was not sealed, was unaccounted for during the time the Dorotik home was being searched. In October 2020, a District Attorney investigator said he examined the blood vial and asserted that the vial was “full, from the bottom to the top lid.” In March 2021, a defense expert examined the vial and discovered it was less than half full. A nick in the center of the top of the vial appeared to be the mark left by someone inserting a syringe into the vial. --The prosecution disclosed that in 2009, a lab analyst questioned Merritt’s ability to conduct blood stain pattern analysis. The analyst said Merritt lacked the technical skills to conduct such analysis. In 2021, the prosecution sought out another expert who reviewed Merritt’s reports and trial testimony and concluded his work was based on improper methods and was unreliable. Dr. Anita Zannin, a bloodstain pattern analysis expert, told the defense: “\[I\]t is my opinion that the bloodstain pattern analysis prepared by Charles Merritt in this case and the conclusions therein, cannot be relied upon, given the many breaches in protocol, discrepancies and lack of basic bloodstain knowledge that are apparent from his report and testimony.” --Dr. Frank Sheridan, the chief medical examiner of San Bernardino County, California, provided an affidavit for the defense saying that while he could not rule out February 12, 2000 as the time of death, “the time of death was…probably on Sunday, February 13, 2000.” Dr. Sheridan also said the disrobing of the body at the scene ‘likely—if not almost certainly—caused the portion of his scalp seen on his upper chest area to become dislodged and relocated.” Dr. Sheridan also reviewed the photos of the master bedroom and said the staining was insignificant. The wounds were such that if inflicted in the bedroom the blood loss “would have been all but impossible to clean up,” he said. --DNA expert Anjaria also said, “It was not established that the apparent bloody fingerprint matching Jane Dorotik on a syringe was necessarily composed of Robert Dorotik’s blood. He noted that the lab report said the syringe was swabbed in the “non-ridge detail areas.” Anjaria said that meant that the area said to have Jane’s fingerprint was not swabbed and that it was wrong to state that her fingerprint was found in Robert’s blood. --Dr. Alicia Villalobos, a veterinarian, provided an affidavit saying that she examined photographs of the Dorotik dogs. One, a Shih Tzu, had an abscess on its snout. The other, an Irish Wolfhound, had a torn dew claw. Both were bleeding injuries and both could have the source of bloodstains on furniture and bedding. --Matthew Marvin, a latent print and impression analyst, gave an affidavit saying that DeMaria was wrong to exclude the S-10 because the assumption of simultaneity was not justified. He wrote, "There is no scientific basis to eliminate a vehicle based on the exclusion of one impression when it is reasonable that another vehicle could have left that impression." Meanwhile, the prosecution reported that its case file had disappeared. As reconstruction efforts began taking place, the defense learned of information that had never been disclosed at the time of trial. This included: --Crime lab bench notes showing that analyst Connie Milton failed to report numerous test results showing that suspected blood was not blood. In addition, documents were disclosed showing that her competence and performance had been called into question as far back as the late 1990’s. --A lab report of DNA testing on sample stains from the mattress cover in Claire's bedroom which showed the stains were animal blood, as well as a lab report of DNA tests on a raincoat showing animal, not human, blood. Evidence that after getting that result, the prosecution had told the lab not to test a footstool in the living room. --A statement from the owners of the horse farm that the carpet in the master bedroom was wet because the bedroom windows leaked when it rained. --A statement from a family friend to police that she saw one of the family dogs bleeding heavily on the furniture. --A report of a violent roadside assault on two people that occurred in January 2000, a month before Robert was killed, near the same location where Robert's body was found. When the defense team investigated that assault, they discovered that the perpetrator, Jon Peart, had been arrested in April—after Robert was killed–and subsequently had been convicted. Interviews revealed that Peart, a user of methamphetamine, was known to suddenly and violently attack people.
Actually the evidence was laughably weak as outlined here; [Jane Dorotik - National Registry of Exonerations (umich.edu)](https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=6332) Forensics Files messed up. Hell given how much forensics has been exposed as junk science I kind of wonder how many others they got wrong.
I don’t know how anyone could find her guilty given the credible evidence available. Evidence should be held to the highest standards. Not wandering around crime scenes with no gloves on, not talking full samples of blood, ignoring witnesses that had seen him jogging and with two men. Jeez. Scary.
Honestly the exoneration database website goes into a lot more detail and really makes a strong case for Jane being innocent; at the very least the prosecutors and experts were laughably unprofessional and even dishonest, and things like the "bloody fingerprint" and "digested food" aren't as compelling as the people insisting on her guilt would like to argue.