True Love

[The Reaper]

Here is a model military wife.:rolleyes:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,248684,00.html


Wife Convicted of Poisoning Marine Husband With Arsenic for Life Insurance
Tuesday, January 30, 2007

AP

Cynthia Sommer
SAN DIEGO — A jury Tuesday convicted a woman of murdering her Marine husband with arsenic to cash in on his $250,000 life insurance policy to finance a luxurious lifestyle.

The jury also found that Cynthia Sommer, 33, committed the first-degree murder with the special circumstances of poisoning and for financial gain.

Sommer could be sentenced to life in prison. She swallowed and stared as the verdict was read.

In the court's spectator area, her mother burst into tears at the verdict and sobbed.

Prosecutors argued that Sommer wanted a more luxurious lifestyle than she could afford on the $1,700 monthly salary Sgt. Todd Sommer brought home and saw the military life insurance policy as a way to "set herself free."

Sommer's defense attorney, Robert Udell, told jurors that his client had lost her "knight in shining armor" and repeatedly returned to the absence of any paper trail linking Sommer to the arsenic.

With no direct evidence that Sommer was the source of the arsenic detected in her husband's liver, Deputy District Attorney Laura Gunn relied heavily on circumstantial evidence of Sommer's financial debt to show that she had a motive to kill her 23-year-old husband.

His death was initially ruled a heart attack. Tests of his liver later found levels of arsenic 1,020 times above normal.

Cynthia Sommer's friends and co-workers testified during the trial that she threw wild parties, got her breasts enlarged and had casual sex with multiple partners in the weeks after her husband's collapse.

Gunn asserted that the defendant was the only person with the motive and access to poison the Marine.

Todd Sommer spiked a 103-degree fever and visited an urgent care clinic on base complaining of gastrointestinal pain a week before his death on Feb. 18, 2002.

His widow testified that he had been well enough the day before to drink beer during a family trip to Knott's Berry Farm amusement park in Orange County.

Cynthia Sommer's in-laws testified that she objected when they asked her to put her husband's $250,000 death benefit in trust for herself, their baby and her three children from a previous marriage.

She cried when called to the stand Jan. 17, dabbing her eyes as she recounted her husband's final moments.

But she also said during cross-examination that she hadn't been able to envision her future with the Marine. The pair married in 1999.

She is now engaged to a former Marine she met two months after her husband's death. She was extradited last March to California from her current home in West Palm Beach, Florida.

[Gypsy]

Hope she never gets out of prison alive.

[echoes]

Sometimes, there are not enough words! :mad:

Holly

[Warrior-Mentor]

I saw the title of this thread and thought TR was getting soft on us...

People never cease to amaze me. Who's the retard who gets engaged to a woman who just whacked her previous husband???

Think Darwin might have sothing to say about the fiance?

[Ladyhawke]

Life in prison would be too "good" for this person, even the worst prison in this country could not inflict enough horrors on her to equal what she did to her husband IMO. I do think there is a special place in hell for her and those like her. Though this Marine's service was short, may his family be proud!

[Roguish Lawyer]

Like $250K is going to get you luxury for life in San Diego . . . :rolleyes:

[The Reaper]

Like $250K is going to get you luxury for life in San Diego . . . :rolleyes:

She wasn't looking for that.

She wanted new boobs and luxury till the next husband.

Get it?

As already noted, what did she plan for the next Marine?

TR

[echoes]

She wasn't looking for that.

She wanted new boobs and luxury till the next husband.

Get it?

As already noted, what did she plan for the next Marine?

TR

Sir,

IMO, credibility assesment needs to be taught at a young age.

I hope she fries in prison.

Holly

edited to add: Welcome Ladyhawke! Thank You for Your service! :)

[JGarcia]

Sir,

IMO, credibility assesment needs to be taught at a young age.


Ditto. I think they should add one more week to infantry AIT to teach this valuable skill to our 18 year old Privates out there trying to get married.

[hitman]

I hope that she gets everything that is coming to her. But to take a life for what amounts to nothing. Sad state of the world we live in.

[The Reaper]

I hate to say it, but every installation I have ever been assigned to has a collection of older women with children from previous relationships who prey on young troops.

Generally, they don't kill them, they just marry them, bleed them of all of their funds and a couple of years of support, maybe have another kid, and move on to the next victim.

I have encountered several of them in a professional capacity, and some have been married to as many as five or six different soldiers. They know the regs and their entitlements better than most commanders do. There are probably men who prey on female troops in a similar way, but in SF units, I never met them.

The problem is normally young, immature kids who let their little heads think for their big heads, and do not differentiate lust from love. Makes me (as a Neanderthal) wish that the CoC still had to sign off on a kid getting married.

This is a shame as about 99% of all of the military wives I have met have been outstandingly supportive people who hold the home together and do both Mommy's and Daddy's jobs while the husband is deployed.

TR

[hitman]

.

This is a shame as about 99% of all of the military wives I have met have been outstandingly supportive people who hold the home together and do both Mommy's and Daddy's jobs while the husband is deployed.

TR

I understand your view. My first wife made me a much smarter man. I was deployed twice when I was with her. First for Desert Fox and the second to Kosovo. When I came back off of my second trip, I came to an empty parkiing lot. She had taken everything that I own (including my two Rotties and a 70 Camero that me and my dad restored). My bank account was empty and she was knocked up. My CoC ordered me to pay her my BAQ 2 which was roughly 80% of my BAH and all of my BAS until the divorce was final even though blood test proved that the kid wasn't mine. Needless to say, she decided not to sign the papers for well over a year. And I couldn't do anything because I was deployed again. Since then, she has been married 3 more times to other soldiers.

just venting, that S@%* still eats me up
:boohoo

[Ladyhawke]

Well TR if wishing the CoC still signed off on young soldiers getting married makes you a Neanderthal, wonder what it makes me since I happen to agree with you. In fact I recall doing just that while I was a company CO in Korea, and I did disapprove a request from one of my troops, he was 18, she worked in the 'ville' and I was transfering him out for blackmarketing activities. (yep, she and her family were deeply involved in that operation). He left country without her. Guess all this does is show my age somewhat huh! Let's face it, there are predators on both sides, men and women, roll the dice as to which is the worst.

Echoes-- Thankyou for your support to those of us that have served and are still serving, we need more like you.

[The Reaper]

I understand your view. My first wife made me a much smarter man. I was deployed twice when I was with her. First for Desert Fox and the second to Kosovo. When I came back off of my second trip, I came to an empty parkiing lot. She had taken everything that I own (including my two Rotties and a 70 Camero that me and my dad restored). My bank account was empty and she was knocked up. My CoC ordered me to pay her my BAQ 2 which was roughly 80% of my BAH and all of my BAS until the divorce was final even though blood test proved that the kid wasn't mine. Needless to say, she decided not to sign the papers for well over a year. And I couldn't do anything because I was deployed again. Since then, she has been married 3 more times to other soldiers.

just venting, that S@%* still eats me up
:boohoo

BAS is not for dependents, it is for the soldier. That is how they take it while you are in the field eating MREs. If that ever happened here, I would advise the troop to request a meal card. Let her use half of that.

According to AR 608-99, in the event of marital separation, the BAH is divvied up according to the number of dependents and the number of households they reside in. There is no provision for the soldier's own housing, and that is the crux of my beef with the policy. IMHO, if they give all of the BAH away, he/she should be given a room in the barracks or BEQ. Of course, civil court orders trump everything. If there are no children, she gets the entire BAH till the court settles it. Prior to the latest revision I am aware of, she could have gotten pregnant while turning tricks, be a heroin addict, used the quarters to cook meth, have killed the kids, and she was still entitled to his BAH. The most recent revision to the reg permits the battalion commander to reduce or waive the amount, depending on wrongdoing by the affected parties. Sounds like yours was before that change.

Yes, before I am targeted here, there are probably an equal number of husbands who do bad things as well. Just saw more of the other type and usually heard his side first.

TR

[echoes]

I hate to say it, but every installation I have ever been assigned to has a collection of older women with children from previous relationships who prey on young troops.

Generally, they don't kill them, they just marry them, bleed them of all of their funds and a couple of years of support, maybe have another kid, and move on to the next victim.
TR

Sir,

That is sad to know.
I learned my lesson last year...Now, more than ever, I am going to go for what is vetted in the opposite sex. Talk is cheap, situational awareness is key.

Ladyhawke: We need more like you! TY.

Holly

[Ladyhawke]

TR I like and respect you too much to target you :) , besides if I had you in my sights you would know it. Have you figured out who I am yet? :)

[The Reaper]

TR I like and respect you too much to target you :) , besides if I had you in my sights you would know it. Have you figured out who I am yet? :)

Waaaay ahead of you, from the first post.

Welcome aboard.:D

TR

[Ladyhawke]

And I thought I could hide!:D There I go thinking, can't get much past you.;) Sometimes I have to wonder though, after reading some of these folks experiences, what were their CoC's thinking? Or were they thinking? What has happened to common sense? Horror stories, lots of them on both sides. Glad I am wired different. Two sides to every story and the only ones that have the entire story are usually the two poeple involved. Everyone else normally only gets the little parts of the story.

[CRad]

This is a shame as about 99% of all of the military wives I have met have been outstandingly supportive people who hold the home together and do both Mommy's and Daddy's jobs while the husband is deployed.

TR
I appreciate the kind remark.

We hold it together during deployments because, finally, we have free access to the 550 cord and 100 mph tape. :p

My feelings are you guys have the short end of the stick. That woman is a disgrace.

[echoes]

I appreciate the kind remark.

We hold it together during deployments because, finally, we have free access to the 550 cord and 100 mph tape. :p

Just wanted to add...IMHO, Ya'll are the ones that help the most. Thank You!:)

Holly

[LibraryLady]

RIP Marine. Prayers out to your child, stepchildren, parents and family.

Here's hoping them bolt-ons get her LOTS of attention on the inside.

LL

[echoes]

RIP Marine. Prayers out to your child, stepchildren, parents and family.

Here's hoping them bolt-ons get her LOTS of attention on the inside.

LL

Well said LL! :confused:

Holly

[The Reaper]

First, I don't watch Larry King or his drivel.

Second, I am sure that the manipulative little bitch had a good story to tell. She has had plenty of time to come up with it and to rehearse.

Finally, I don't know about you, and I have only 49 years of experience on this planet, but not too many people have a chance to put stuff in my food other than my family when they prepare it. I really doubt that the local Burger King or the Mess Hall cooks were trying to get just him because they didn't like the way he talked.

Frankly, you sound a little bit naive and might want to reexamine your acquaintances with a jaundiced eye. You sound like her target audience.

TR

[82ndtrooper]

Ditto. I think they should add one more week to infantry AIT to teach this valuable skill to our 18 year old Privates out there trying to get married.


Better yet, restrict their online activities from visiting the "Military Chat Rooms" I know of one woman that has married 3 Airmen by just maintaining her presense in those rooms. She has now moved to Melbourne, Florida to be even closer to Patrick AFB. "Kookoo, Kookoo" :eek:

I thought "Tag Chasers" were bad in the 80's, it's even worse with the internet.

P.S.
I dont know her personally. She worked with my sister at GTE in N.C. :p

[82ndtrooper]

I agree, and you are probably right. I see your points (I mean who else would or could have done it?). I just don't want to wrongfully end up judging her if she really is innocent. There have been cases of someone convicted of a murder in the past and then, twenty-some years later, they discover the person didn't do it. I figured if the evidence didn't make enough sense, there's always the small chance she might not have done it.

But then again, like you say, there is a very good chance she is just a good manipulator as well (I've seen the sweetie-pie act with different people by my demon of a cousin).

Hopefully the outcome of the whole thing will be the right one.


So your agreeing that your naive ?? :p

[Defender968]

Broadsword2004 I don’t post too much most the time, I just read and learn, but I'm going to weigh in here. First not only do you seem a little naive, you also appear to have no idea how a crime is investigated, nor any clue on the subject matter in question. It also appears you haven't even done much research on this matter, so I would caution you to be very careful on how you broach this kind of speculation as it appears both naive and arrogant. Realize that at least 15 people who do have all the information believed that this woman was guilty, and at least 3 of those do this for a living. Because of your lack of understanding of the subject matter and your "concern" for her innocence let me explain it to you.

In order to successfully prosecute this type of case you need to have an investigator/detective (who does this for a living) believe that he has sufficient evidence to take it to the DA/solicitor, part of that evidence will have to be the autopsy, bringing in the second professional, the coroner or medical examiner. The coroner will have to believe that there is sufficient evidence that the victim was murdered. If your coroner says this wasn't a murder, then typically the investigation will not go very far, and with out them the DA/Solicitor certainly will not prosecute the case about 99.9 percent of the time. Speaking of DA/Solicitors they don't like to loose high profile cases so if there isn't sufficient evidence to prove guilt they will generally not go to court with it, sometimes they'll go to court on 50/50 cases, but when it's high profile they like to have their ducks in a row. After those three you have the 12 folks on the jury that have to be convinced, and they are presented with most if not all of the evidence.

Your clear lack of understanding of criminal investigations makes your statements not only naive but more than a little presumptuous. Understand I am a LEO, and I know how to investigate crimes, but even with my understanding of how to investigate crimes I don't second guess another LE professionals work i.e. the civilian investigator/detective and the NCIS agent who are actually working this case. I don't play Monday morning quarterback because I don't like it when folks do it on cases I've handled, and I realize that if I'm not actually involved in the case I likely don't have all the information. Even after doing a little research on the internet what I’ve found makes me believe she’s guilty. I understand you're concerned about a person being wrongfully committed and that is noble, and even respectable if you know what you're talking about. You are basing your opinion on incomplete information, Larry King and if I had to guess watching too much CSI or NCIS and in stating this uneducated opinion you are questioning not only the validity of our legal system, but the integrity of 15 people who have all the information. Quite frankly as an LEO it pisses me off for 2 reasons. First I don't presume to tell an engineer how to do his job, how can you think you know all the angles of investigating and prosecuting a murder case as a 22 year old student. Second I know and work with a lot of police officers, and while there are a few bad apples most are honest professionals who do everything in their power to do the right thing, they don't just try to convict folks just because. I personally take the power/responsibility to take away someone's freedom very seriously, especially because I also have done my part as a military member to defend those freedoms, and most of the cops I work with feel the same way.

Let's take an educated look at this. First the reason that LEOs look at the family and then friends before anyone else is because a large portion of the time that's who kills people. Most LEO's know this. You're much more likely to be killed by someone you know that to be the victim of a random crime. I didn't know the statistics for it but I did go out and find them. Now according to the FBI's statistics in 04 which is what I found first, "76.8 percent of the victims knew their killers " of those who knew their killers "29.8 percent were murdered by family members" http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html
This tells us there is a good chance that the person who murdered the victim is someone in the family. As TR said who else has the access to his food which is the most likely way to be poisoned by arsenic.

Now your fist statement was way off base, and if I had to guess came from something you heard on Larry King. You said "1) no direct connection found between her and the arsenic (no evidence she ever attempted to buy it, attempted to possess it, etc...)" The fact that she hadn't been proved to have tried to acquire or have ever had any arsenic is laughable. I worked in a hardware store when I was younger and you could buy rat poison and ant poison that was made of arsenic. I looked it up online and there are still weed killers, rat and ant poison on the market that are made of arsenic. So saying she was never proven to have had it or tried to acquire it is ridiculous. I'm sure it was very simple for her to take a crisp 10 dollar bill and walk into Lowes or Ace hardware and buy a box of rat poison with no traces that she did so, it's not like buying polonium-210.

Second you said she put the 145K of the 250K into a trust for the kids, true but who do you think the executor of the trust is? Which still may give her access to how the money is spent, and takes the burden of providing for the kids off her shoulders, which is still motive IMHO.

Third the spending spree, while it could have been a coping mechanism the thing that stuck me is that she had discussed getting the implants with her husband and from what I've read he didn't approve/said no. Further they couldn't afford it without the $$ from his SGLI, yet the day he started showing symptoms, which was 10 days before he died she went to get a consultation on getting the implants. As an LEO this is highly suspicious, I don't tend to believe in coincidences.

On top of the implants they had proof she signed up for an online dating service 2 weeks before her husband died, now I read a quote from her saying she loved her husband, was innocent, blah, blah, blah, but if she wasn't looking for another meal ticket then why the dating service?

Just these facts alone give me both motive and opportunity and If I were a betting man I'd wager my paycheck she's guilty as hell. Do we have a smoking gun no, but if it were always that simple we wouldn't need investigators.

I could go on but I'm not going to as this post is already very long and the bottom line is 12 people believed the evidence that was presented. The arguments you're basing your opinion on are woefully inadequate in knowledge. I'm by no means on expert on this case, nor am I the smartest police officer ever to live, but I can make that statement because I am educated on how to investigate, and I have taken a cursory look at this case. Even with my background I won't presume to make definitive statements or question a person’s guilt, it's not my place as it's not yours and the reality is that 15 people already made that call. So before you start worrying about who's guilty or innocent, remember you are not a detective nor were you on the jury so you don't have all the information. What little you read in the news and especially what you hear on Larry King is almost never the whole story and in Larry King’s case is usually slanted. The next time you want to second guess a professional's work at least do a little research on the subject, and make sure you have at least some knowledge of the subject in question.

[The Reaper]

Defender968:

That was one of the best and most articulate explanations of the investigative process of a crime I have ever heard.

I can't count the number of times I have seen some scumbag lying through his teeth, despite real direct evidence, and heard someone say, "Oh, he could never do that", or "My baby is a good boy, he wouldn't do that", or "Why don't they listen to him, he said that he didn't do it?" Thirty minutes of "Cops" will show you how many cockroaches live in our society simply because it is illegal to kill them and the system protects them. They can be counted on to lie like rugs, even after being caught in the process of committing the crime on the dash or TV camera when they feel it will be in their best interest. If you ever visit a jail and talk to people, almost 100% are innocent victims of The Man and his conspiracy.

Maybe it is a function of saturation after a few years, or I am just jaded, but when I hear someone say that they did not do something that they are accused of, I wonder just how much the authorities have on them, what the alternative possibilities are, and what they had to gain by committing the crime, versus what they have to lose. Means, motive, and opportunity.

It also annoys me greatly when you clearly see someone do something on tape, and the media has to refer to them as allegedly committing a crime. When I see Brian Nichols disarm a deputy, shoot two people to death, and escape from the Atlanta Courthouse, all caught on tape, being referred to as the alleged perpetrator and pleading not guilty, I have to wonder where our heads are at.

Yes, I understand innocent till proven guilty, but I also believe that justice delayed is justice denied. Trials as soon as the evidence is gathered and the case prepared, appeals heard at one level higher, sentences imposed within 72hours thereafter.

TR

[Defender968]

Thanks TR I appreciate your comments, and I share your frustration with the system, I just keep trying to remind myself that even though it's a very flawed system, it's the best one out there. I try to keep that mindset but I would definitely consider myself jaded. Unfortunately it's hard as an informed citizen or LEO and not get that way in IMHO.

I too have seen first hand how many times the system fails society and lets dirtbags back on the street. It's sad how many times judges buy into the lies or the sob stories hook line and sinker. I've only met one criminal in my career who was honest about his criminal behavior. And that was a crack head who was pulled over for multiple driving offenses, he was high, and had his license suspended several times before being finally revoked, when asked about his behavior and why he continues to get in trouble with the law? His answer was so simple and truthful it was shocking, he said "I love crack, I'll smoke it every chance I get, I'll lie, I'll steal from my mother, I do whatever it takes to get my next rock" It was sad, but somehow refreshing at the same time.

He by far and large was the minority who will own up to their crimes. It's the constant lying that has jaded me I think. TR you're right, if you ask most in prison they'll tell you how they're innocent. The only up side is that as an LEO dealing with these dirtbags, I have become good at spotting liars, and as said in a movie a few years ago, "I can smell a lie like a fart in a car"

Thanks again

[82ndtrooper]

Defender 968, thank you for that information. Yes, I am very naive and yes 82nd, I was admitting that. I don't watch CSI or crime shows much though, but regardless you are right, I was Monday-morning quarterbacking, which I shouldn't have done. I was just very confused. I did not mean to come off as arrogant or judgemental of the professionals such as yourself who have years of experience in this field, and for that I apologize, I didn't mean to offend you or anyone else for that matter, but you are correct, it is very confusing for folk who have no idea of how the legal process works.

And you are definitely right I should have done more research on that before posting. You are right about the media manipulating the information to, I should know better as I have read about some cases like that before where the media twisted everything around.

I am very sorry if I offended anyone else. I will follow your previous advice TR and refrain from posting for two weeks this time.


Shall I hand you another shovel ? The one your using seems to be worn out.:p

[The Reaper]

Defender 968, thank you for that information. Yes, I am very naive and yes 82nd, I was admitting that. I don't watch CSI or crime shows much though, but regardless you are right, I was Monday-morning quarterbacking, which I shouldn't have done. I was just very confused. I did not mean to come off as arrogant or judgemental of the professionals such as yourself who have years of experience in this field, and for that I apologize, I didn't mean to offend you or anyone else for that matter, but you are correct, it is very confusing for folk who have no idea of how the legal process works.

And you are definitely right I should have done more research on that before posting. You are right about the media manipulating the information to, I should know better as I have read about some cases like that before where the media twisted everything around.

I am very sorry if I offended anyone else. I will follow your previous advice TR and refrain from posting for two weeks this time.

BS:

No need, just consider what you are saying, if you have done your homework, think before hitting the Submit Reply button.

I certainly learned from this.

Shall I hand you another shovel ? The one your using seems to be worn out.:p

Deuce, I think you should leave the spot corrections and disciplinary actions to the QPs. You are not the one to be pointing out the motes in others eyes. Take care of your own house.

TR

[82ndtrooper]

BS:

No need, just consider what you are saying, if you have done your homework, think before hitting the Submit Reply button.

I certainly learned from this.



Deuce, I think you should leave the spot corrections and disciplinary actions to the QPs. You are not the one to be pointing out the motes in others eyes. Take care of your own house.

TR

Roger that !! Wilco.

[Defender968]

Defender 968, thank you for that information. Yes, I am very naive and yes 82nd, I was admitting that. I don't watch CSI or crime shows much though, but regardless you are right, I was Monday-morning quarterbacking, which I shouldn't have done. I was just very confused. I did not mean to come off as arrogant or judgemental of the professionals such as yourself who have years of experience in this field, and for that I apologize, I didn't mean to offend you or anyone else for that matter, but you are correct, it is very confusing for folk who have no idea of how the legal process works.

And you are definitely right I should have done more research on that before posting. You are right about the media manipulating the information to, I should know better as I have read about some cases like that before where the media twisted everything around.

I am very sorry if I offended anyone else. I will follow your previous advice TR and refrain from posting for two weeks this time.

Broadsword2004 you're welcome for the info, and apology accepted, don't worry you didn't offend me, just ruffled my dander a little. Sounds like you learned something so a positive outcome has been achieved.

[sg1987]

Gents,
I must say that as I watched this dialogue I was impressed with the class of the participants. I saw not only the knowledge and insight of some, but also the quick willingness to “fess up” to a mistake made by another, followed by correction and reconciliation. I for one am not only continuing to learn on the “technical” side of things but in the ways to think in my interaction with others as well. Class, true class. Thanks to you all.