In 1986, a woman was murdered in her LA home & cops called it botched burglary; her father suspected her husband’s old lover, an LAPD officer, & DNA proved him right 22 years later

A decades-old murder in Los Angeles was eventually cracked after DNA evidence pointed investigators towards an LAPD officer who had once been romantically involved with the victim's husband. More than 20 years after Sherri Rasmussen was killed, Stephanie Lazarus was convicted of her murder.

Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, jurors in Lindsay Clancy's murder trial are facing a very different question as they struggle to reach a unanimous verdict over the deaths of her three children. Her defence says she was suffering from postpartum psychosis, while prosecutors argue that she understood her actions were wrong.

Read more - Jeff Bezos's ex-wife MacKenzie Scott has given over $1 billion to HBCUs: From a $42 million gift to Elizabeth City State to $80 million for Howard University, here’s the full list

Sherri Rasmussen murder case began in 1986

On February 24, 1986, Sherri Rasmussen was found dead inside the condominium she shared with her husband, John Ruetten, in Van Nuys, Los Angeles.

Rasmussen, who was 29, had been beaten and shot three times. The Los Angeles Police Department initially treated the killing as a possible botched burglary, but investigators were unable to identify the person responsible.

The investigation stalled after several months, and the case remained unsolved for more than two decades.

Sherri Rasmussen's father pointed to an LAPD officer

Rasmussen's father, Nels Rasmussen, was convinced that the burglary theory was wrong. He suspected Stephanie Lazarus, an LAPD officer who had previously been in a relationship with Ruetten.

Lazarus had reportedly remained interested in Ruetten and had confronted Rasmussen over their relationship. Despite the family's suspicions, investigators did not identify Lazarus as the killer at the time. The case eventually went cold.

DNA match cracked the decades-old murder case

In 2008, detectives revisiting the cold case began focusing on Lazarus, who had by then become an LAPD detective.

Investigators secretly obtained a DNA sample from Lazarus. Testing showed that it matched biological evidence recovered from a bite mark on Rasmussen's body.

The DNA discovery gave detectives the breakthrough they had been missing for more than 20 years.

Lazarus was subsequently arrested and convicted of first-degree murder in 2012. She received a sentence of 27 years to life in prison.

Stephanie Lazarus challenged her conviction

Lazarus appealed her conviction, arguing that the age of the case and the evidence had affected her right to due process. She also challenged the search warrant and aspects of an interview conducted before her arrest.

Her conviction was upheld in 2015, and the California Supreme Court declined to hear a further appeal.

During a parole hearing in 2023, Lazarus confessed to the murder. A parole panel initially granted her release, but the decision was later rescinded by the full board in late 2024.

Questions were raised over the original investigation

The Rasmussen case also generated questions about the handling of evidence during the original LAPD investigation.

Some police files appeared to suggest that evidence that could have implicated Lazarus earlier may have been removed or tampered with. Lazarus had access to LAPD files during parts of her career, while questions were also raised about whether other officers could have played a role.

Rasmussen's parents later sued the LAPD over the investigation, but their legal action was unsuccessful.

The criminalist who identified key DNA evidence from the bite mark also sued, alleging that police had pressured her to favour certain suspects and that she faced retaliation after raising concerns. Her lawsuit was unsuccessful.

Lindsay Clancy murder trial enters seventh day of jury deliberations

In a separate Massachusetts case, jurors in Lindsay Clancy's murder trial are preparing to begin a seventh day of deliberations after repeatedly reaching an impasse over whether she should be convicted of killing her three young children.

The 12-member jury is expected to reconvene in Plymouth, Massachusetts, after Judge William Sullivan rejected a request from Clancy's defence lawyer to remove a juror who was accused of refusing to follow the judge's instructions concerning "reasonable doubt".

Judge rejects request to remove juror

Defence attorney Kevin Reddington sought the juror's removal after the judge received a note from the jury and re-instructed them on the meaning of reasonable doubt.

A jury can convict Clancy of first-degree murder only if prosecutors prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jurors had already sent notes to the judge on Tuesday and Wednesday saying they were unable to reach a unanimous decision. On both occasions, Sullivan instructed them to continue deliberating.

The judge's decision means the same 12 jurors will continue considering the case.

Lindsay Clancy admitted killing her children

Clancy, 36, has admitted strangling her three children on January 24, 2023, using exercise bands in the basement of the family's home in Duxbury, a Boston suburb.

The victims were five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan.

After killing the children, Clancy cut herself with a knife and jumped from a second-storey window in an attempt to take her own life. The fall left her paralysed.

Defence says postpartum psychosis led to killings

During the six-week trial, Reddington argued that Clancy was experiencing a psychotic episode when she killed her children.

Her defence focused heavily on her mental health following the birth of her third child. Family members, including her former husband Patrick, testified about her struggles and repeated attempts to seek treatment from healthcare providers.

Clancy had also been prescribed multiple medications during this period.

A former labour and delivery nurse at Massachusetts General Hospital, Clancy's mental state has become central to the question of whether she should be held criminally responsible for the killings.

Prosecutors argue Clancy knew the killings were wrong

Prosecutors do not dispute that Clancy was experiencing mental health problems before the deaths.

However, they argue that she remained capable of understanding that killing her children was wrong and deliberately chose to do so.

The prosecution's case is that Clancy had decided to kill herself and believed that her children would suffer without her. Prosecutors argue that this shows she was able to understand the consequences and wrongfulness of her actions.

Trial featured more than 80 witnesses

The trial included testimony from more than 80 witnesses and more than 300 exhibits.

The jury must now decide whether prosecutors have established the required level of criminal responsibility for a first-degree murder conviction.

If the jurors cannot reach a unanimous verdict, Judge Sullivan could declare a mistrial. Prosecutors would then have to decide whether to retry the case.

What happens if Lindsay Clancy is convicted?

Clancy faces life imprisonment without parole if convicted of first-degree murder.

If she is found not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, she could instead be committed to a state psychiatric hospital for evaluation.

For now, jurors remain divided and are due to return for another day of deliberations.


Inputs from agencies