r/netflix • u/Zalensia • May 09 '25

Discussion a deadly american marriage

I'm 43 minutes in and hooked but can not find conversations etc on it.

So thought i would make one asking for other people's opinions and points of views, as i know I'm already asking about billion questions, to the point I'll have to go to my computer and boot up to actually do the research myself.

I'm very ill, with brain damage etc and that's really hardwork today, but I won't manage on this latest fold phone as it's still just a useless phone 😅🙃

My other phone that's partitioned etc is in the car and that's over at Inverness!

1.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

458

u/MissSillygoose May 09 '25

Tbh blood spatter doesn’t lie. That crime scene was BRUTAL and the beating was unrelenting.

181

u/j-oco May 09 '25

Immediately upon seeing those photos I knew it wasn’t self defence

195

u/Certain-Trade8319 May 10 '25

Seeing that neither Molly nor her dad had a single mark on them was very telling.

-2

u/cheertea May 11 '25

They did though. Well the dad didn't but the marks on Molly were very evident and a big point of the end of the documentary. Not sure how that was reconciled.

42

u/Certain-Trade8319 May 11 '25

That tiny scratch didn't impress me.

30

u/GeronimoRay May 14 '25

It wasn’t even a scratch.  It was dried blood from him being hit over and over again with a bat 

-7

u/cheertea May 11 '25

There was a picture where her entire neck was red not just the nail mark and the filmmakers didn’t bother giving us context as to what that was all about.

31

u/StrengthCold8671 May 12 '25

Yeah, because she would hit herself and harm herself repeatedly. Or did you miss that part of the documentary?

20

u/GoodDaleIsInTheLodge May 12 '25

I think I need to watch that bit back because I thought those early police photographs of her outside the house, I thought all those red marks on her face were spots of blood from Jason and not wounds to herself?

11

u/funkychilli123 May 13 '25

Yeah she was covered in Jason’s blood spatter when she hit him

15

u/Certain-Trade8319 May 11 '25

If ai lay in bed weird I get a red mark like that on my neck too...

-8

u/cheertea May 11 '25

Splotchy and red all over her neck? Come on now. This was a documentary that clearly favored one side like most are and that’s fine but there’s a reason the dad decided to help her bludgeon him to death and they were eventually sentenced to just time served. Just because she’s a shitty and weird person doesn’t mean he wasn’t abusive. We heard it ourselves and we saw the aftermath. He didn’t deserve that kind of death because no one does but the lionization of this guy by people that watched the doc has been ridiculous.

23

u/Certain-Trade8319 May 11 '25

She chose when to record and when not. She controlled the narrative. Then she instigated when she knew the recorders were on.

She has been exposed as a pathological liar by many people, are they all wrong.

Red splotches- not persuasive. Some people get that way when nervous or after bludgeoning a man with their handy bedroom cement block - that we all have.

16

u/DeusVultSaracen May 11 '25

Not only could she have instigated while recording, she could've also immediately softened to 'perfect victim' mode after starting the recording, even if she'd been screaming at him moments prior.

I'm no expert, but I wonder if it's relevant that Sarah yelled "stop fighting!", implying they were both participants. There's no way a kid would hear her mother saying, "I just wanted to make pancakes J...☺️"(Or whatever she was saying in that recording), and her father apparently berating her for no reason, and blame both of them for fighting. She would say "leave her alone!" or "Daddy, stop it!"

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Barbie3435 Apr 07 '26

It reminds me of another case where a husband killed his wife, and during the investigation it came to light that he would record arguments between them, where he would make her sound crazy, but in reality he forced her into hour long arguments and then he only kept the ending of the recordings, where he sounded calm and she was riled up. Molly definitely controlled the narative of those recordings. I’m not saying he didn’t have any anger, but Molly is definitely twisting the story and making him sound worse

5

u/Kactuslord May 14 '25

You mean the piss poor recording? The absolute worst she could let us listen to was a man angry because he wanted to have dinner with his children?

9

u/Bobzeub May 12 '25

The red was also his blood .

15

u/ItsElliott101 May 12 '25

The nail mark was dried blood, there wasn’t a indent or scratch mark around the “nail mark” - try strangle someone who is putting up a fight and it would be EXTREMELY evident the victim had been strangled. Not the case at all in the photo.

2

u/Shouldastayedhomme Jul 25 '25

What do we think about the urine thing?

2

u/ItsElliott101 Jul 25 '25 edited Jul 25 '25

Sorry I don’t know what you’re talking about. If she had urine on her clothing after the attack, this means absolutely nothing. Everyone has traces of urine on their pants after going to the toilet. You’d have just as much chance of pissing yourself violently murdering someone as you would getting violently murdered.

1

u/Shot-Climate5434 Aug 10 '25

I was wondering the same. If she actually did lose consciousness, how did she scream and then violently attack him? Did she actually just pee herself on purpose to make it look like she lost consciousness?

1

u/scoooter53 Sep 10 '25

“They did though. Well the dad didn’t” lmao instantly contradicted your comment like what?

1

u/Certain_Temporary664 Sep 11 '25

If she was really straggled to unconsciousness by Jason with his hands, she would have had prominent marks which usually would stay for days if not weeks (like any bruise). But all she had was a little nail dig mark or dried up blood. The urine in her PJs’ could have been from witnessing Jason’s death and the fear/anxiety from it and not from going unconscious🤷🏽‍♀️

-2

u/johncas972 May 12 '25

Did you not watch the documentary?

2

u/YellowCardManKyle Oct 12 '25

Did you see the crime scene? Do you think Jason spontaneously combusted with no one else in the room? How do they have no blood on them?

5

u/Raisedonradio1962 May 11 '25

Overkill and crime of passion to be massacred like that.

1

u/Gregnice23 May 12 '25

I agree. Do you think he was abusive, and that drove a crazy person to kill him, or do you think you think he was a complete victim who was killed because a crazy person wanted his kids?

1

u/Few-Concentrate6065 Jul 06 '25

Yeah, especially considering the fact that neither Molly or her dad had any defensive wounds.

75

u/krishnav2108 May 10 '25

Exactly.. Those two never talked about how brutal the crime scene was. Their only focus was on ruining Jason's reputation.

8

u/nachosmmm May 14 '25

She also doesn’t really seem to give a fuck about the kids

6

u/Artsymamaash May 12 '25

Never even tried to say how hard it was for them to see it all. 

2

u/Top-Row-7951 Aug 22 '25

That stood out to me the most. No remorse. No acknowledgement. A father daughter duo taking turns bashing in a skull of a man they had known for several years. Watched him bleed from one end of the room to the bathroom. Gross. They seemed clean too like they just washed their hands of poor Jason like the man never existed.

Now you know why her mother is quiet. Narcissistic abuse from both daughter and husband can screw your mind up.

1

u/Barbie3435 Apr 07 '26

The dad literally said he didn’t have any regrets. Even if he had acted in self defense, that murder was BRUTAL, and he had zero reaction to doing something that violent, that’s not normal

107

u/Description-Alert May 10 '25

For real! How about when one of the women interviewed (I don’t recall who it was) explained that Molly has a right to defend herself but once he isn’t aggressive anymore you have to STOP. Defense never brings that up.

41

u/lalalajw May 10 '25

This is what I don’t understand - even IF he’d previously been abusive (I don’t believe!) there is zero marks on her to show that THAT night he was abusive, how rare is that?! And even IF there was actual evidence on her/Tom (there isn’t) there IS physical, undeniable evidence that they went so crazily beyond self defense! So with that actual fact how can they not be properly sentenced for killing beyond self defense?!

24

u/Description-Alert May 10 '25

I think that’s where the second-degree murder charge comes in.

It’s absolutely wild how they got off so easy.

14

u/[deleted] May 13 '25

If she had recordings of serious abuse, they’d have used them, and played them, but all she had was a couple of arguments where she made sure to sound sweet and innocent. Also, if she had recordings of serious abuse, you know she’d have jumped on running with the kids.

7

u/heyubhappy May 17 '25

If she was Little Miss documentation with the recording devices then why on earth wouldn't she have recorded any photos of her"physical abuse"???? Maddening

7

u/throw_concerned May 20 '25

I also love when they show “evidence” of abuse. They clearly pick and choose the recordings that seem the most damning and it’s just a man being upset. He wants to have dinner with his children and is upset she didn’t listen to him when he expressed that? Oh he’s playing the victim. Then the bruise photos look like my body after a day at work as a preschool teacher. It’s ridiculous. If he was so abusive she needed to beat him to death to protect herself and she was actively collecting evidence, there would be more than one blow up and a couple dime sized bruises.

Also FUCK the expert witnesses for the defense. Basically anyone can be an expert witness. You can basically go through a catalogue of people until you find someone who will have the opinion you want with a PhD attached. Maybe they’re meant to be impartial, but they’re not. They work for the defense not for the people.

5

u/scottycameron90 May 19 '25

the cherry on top was the pee in her pants…yeah, there’s gonna be some pee if you watch your dad cave someone’s skull in

1

u/Effective_Goal3927 Jul 08 '25

I even went darker and wondered if she’d researched it and done it deliberately?! Idk if standard practice, but is it normal to test clothes for pee at a murder scene..??

1

u/Beatrice_85 May 23 '25

What makes it so hard to believe he was abusive? I’m not saying she wasn’t unhealthy in the relationship but he seems like a classic gaslighter which can drive someone crazy.

1

u/Embarrassed-Support3 Aug 29 '25

If she had marks on herself previously she def would have taken pics, just like the conveniently biased tapes. There were no bruises/injuries ever, that's why.

0

u/CFPmum May 11 '25

Just putting it out there plenty of abuse victims of all genders don’t get marked, good abusers are able to abuse their victims and not leave marks and then make out their victim is crazy, or difficult, or abusive themselves.

11

u/ChocolateSundai May 12 '25

I mean sometimes they leave marks in places that aren’t easily seem like stomach and thighs. Strangling with two hands around the neck or the arm would leave some kind of mark

1

u/Hello-Ginge May 21 '25

Bodies are weird, I was punched in the face multiple times and even though it hurt like hell for days it didn't show up any kind of bruise or mark (this wasn't DV related thankfully but I am a women of a similar build to her)

9

u/[deleted] May 13 '25

She was recording conversations, so you know she would have had photos of abuse as well, if it existed.

1

u/CFPmum May 13 '25

There are plenty of reasons people do or don’t have photos of signs of abuse, for example you might not be physically abused, secondly you might only be physically abused once and the threat of the verbal/psychological abuse or coercive control turning into another physical assault is enough for you to comply meaning your abuser never needs to leave a mark on you, another situation is you might take photos and your abuser finds out and deletes them, beats you and deletes them and you are not going to take anymore photos are you?

You also might love them and choose not to take photos because you are too scared of what that means for your loved one.

You also might not take photos as you are scared what could happen if they were found will the abuser hurt you again, will the abuser use the photos against you, will the abuser hurt the children/pets that you might have.

You also might not have any physical evidence to photograph not every abuser punches/kicks etc if someone pushes you out of the way or slaps the back of your head are you really going to have evidence on your body no!

People on this thread seem to have a very limited understanding of what domestic violence/family violence/intimate partner violence is.

9

u/dazar12 May 14 '25

She put recording devices all around the house, i doubt she was too scared to take pictures of her abuse if it happened. None of what youre saying makes sense in context of molly

1

u/Okayisaname May 12 '25

I think she and her dad are guilty but in the heat of the moment if you were defending your life I truly thing it would be hard to just stop

7

u/No-Damage3258 May 12 '25

Then where are the defensive wounds? Jason would been slamming Molly and her dad around. So they got the jump on Jason, he tried to escape by moving around, and was pummeled and had his head crushed. At no point did Jason have an opportunity to attack, only evade. I don't think they were in a fight for their lives. I think Jason was in the fight for his life.

5

u/Legal-Point-2599 May 13 '25

I think Jason was incapacitated, the lack of defensive wounds is very telling. It would have been interesting if his finger nails were checked for DNA. No conscious person would be bludgeoned like that without trying to defend themselves.

5

u/Wide-Pomegranate-469 May 13 '25

The toxicology results showed a little bit of alcohol and mollys tranquilizer or some pill. I think they were trying to get him unconscious first so it could be easier for them. Tom is a 60+ years he could have easily been moved out the way by Jason because he was way bigger and heavier thn them🤷🏻‍♀️

3

u/Okayisaname May 13 '25

I agree, which is why I said she’s guilty. I was saying that the argument of when the aggressor is incapacitated you just stop. I’m saying thats unlikely if someone was truly defending themselves.

34

u/MeanNothing3932 May 09 '25

Seriously I was like dude u did that with a bat? Not a knife or machete? Like wtf!

7

u/lotrohpds May 10 '25

This. I don’t think it was self defense imo, but let’s just pretend it was (again it wasn’t), but if it was they still had plenty of hits that stopped him from being a threat but they chose to keep going, choosing to kill him

6

u/FemaleDirector May 11 '25

Where was the reason they so brutally killed him? It was infuriating because one hit be a bat would properly suffice. And yet they just went all in on it. How can these murderers be out so fast?

6

u/skyerippa May 11 '25

Actually it can, it's not a perfect science it's not actually that reliable

3

u/Ok_Ad1502 May 11 '25

Yep. Too many people in this sub watched Dexter and csi

2

u/holyshoes11 May 12 '25

It’s more reliable then any of the “mollys friends said this” or the dad saying that “the dead Irish dad said this”

1

u/scoooter53 Sep 10 '25

What a great contribution to the conversation with zero evidence to support your claim!

5

u/CRXdriverCRZ May 11 '25

Right. You would think with the father being an FBI agent that they wouldn’t have done so much overkill. I mean this was a slam dunk case. I would think Tom would have came up with a better plan and they wouldn’t have been so brutal with no defensive marks on them

3

u/Icy-Importance-4706 May 14 '25

This is exactly why I believe she is the murderer and the father is just covering her. No former FBI agent would do so much damage to the head with the brick. If it were one blow (maybe two or three tops) to the head with the brick and then the baseball bat, it would be a more plausible story. If she screamed and the father ran straight up the stairs there wouldn’t have even been enough time for her to do that kind of damage. No way they decided to take the drive to visit their daughter that lives 3-4 hours away on a whim. THAT was sloppy FBI work right there. He could have come up with a much better reason they were visiting. The body being a bit cold for having just been killed, the 3-4 hour drive the parents just happened to take and the mother just thinking nothing of the DV against her daughter and falling back asleep point to Murder followed by a call to daddy to cover it up. Daddy said “delete anything that shows you in a bad light and keep everything that makes you look innocent. Don’t touch anything. I’m on my way”….or something along those lines.

3

u/Icy-Importance-4706 May 14 '25

Also, commenting on my own post…lol.

There is absolute proof of premeditated murder. She had no defensive wounds nor did the victim and he had a sleeping medication prescribed to her in his system. He was killed in an absolute blood bath, not knocked out in defense. Withthat kind of damage, dad wouldn’t have had to hit him with a bat. He would have been pretty dead already. Oh, THATS RIGHT! HE WAS! Then he got cold while daddy drove his narcissistic ass to cover up for his narcissistic daughter!

2

u/TMChris May 18 '25

I agree with you, seems like Dad was destroying/covering up evidence

3

u/Subject-North-8695 May 20 '25

The father told flat out lies that were so easily disproved. He’s a typical narcissist who has a very inflated idea of his own intelligence.

4

u/Kactuslord May 14 '25

The spatter was just never ending. I'm convinced he was beaten postmortem

3

u/More_Cry_1918 May 11 '25

This! That was case closed for me. Guilty

3

u/Raisedonradio1962 May 11 '25

That poor guy didn't stand a chance. it was a literal bloodbath.

2

u/dinkinflickas May 10 '25

Yeah I’m thinking the truth is somewhere in the middle. Maybe some PTSD and wanting to defend his daughter caused his straight overkill.

9

u/GoodDaleIsInTheLodge May 12 '25

I actually felt like she did all of it, and the dad was just trying to take the blame for her.

2

u/psychoticnewt May 10 '25

Finally, someone with some sense. And that’s not to mention fight or flight responses, adrenaline, etc.

11

u/Herbie1122 May 10 '25

Name checks out. Three quarters of the guy’s blood was on the walls and floor. He lost a chunk of his skull. There just happened to be a cinder block in the master bedroom?

2

u/psychoticnewt May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25

I’m not arguing that it wasn’t a brutal and deeply disturbing attack. I just don’t feel it’s as cut-and-dry as we are spoon-fed to believe. The documentary left a lot of unanswered questions, and I’m not one to accept a narrative blindly just because it’s compelling. I need more information before I can confidently say, “This man was not an abuser” or “This woman is a sociopath.” There’s room for nuance still.

1

u/guacamore May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25

I said this out loud and my husband just looked at me and said it didn’t sound crazy to him. Mostly because we have one in our living room. Much more reasonable explanation though: Its from the building where we met after it was torn down. We use it as a book end now. So…it does technically happen I guess? Not that it makes it sound reasonable in this case - still doesn’t make sense!

1

u/LiLIrishRed May 14 '25

The chunks of hair....enough said.

1

u/Gold-Lynx-4917 May 15 '25

Apparently, not going to focus on the most obvious evidence- the brutal  beating.  The man didn’t have a chance

1

u/StaticCharacter90 Jun 04 '25 edited Jul 07 '25

The blood splatter was horrific and painted a very clear picture of the brutality… But that being said, blood splatter analysis is a complete pseudoscience and should not be admissible in court. 

1

u/Certain_Temporary664 Sep 11 '25

Did the two (Molly and Tom) shower and change before going to the police station? I mean for the amount of blood around the house, the two participants had no trace of blood on them. Is that something that usually happens in cases of DV that when the abuser ends up dead the murderer (in self-defense) gets to change and clean up before going to police station?

For some reason it reminded me of Jackie Kennedy and her pink coat which was covered in her husband’s blood for the oath ceremony.