This has to be the right answer - - it has math.
I know this is Café Society, not MPSIMS, but in the spirit of the latter, today my mom mentioned meeting Rob Reiner at an event when they were both working on the George McGovern campaign in 1972.
I’m not surprised the autopsy report is sealed. That’s been common in high profile cases for a long time.
I’ve never heard of retroactively sealing information that was already widely reported. You can’t put the stopper back in the bottle. Imho
https://www.ktalnews.com/video/rob-and-michelle-reiners-autopsy-reports-blocked-from-release/
Is this possibly also because of the son’s pending criminal case, and not wanting to taint a potential jury pool?
The cause of death had been released but that’s only one part of the report. In this case where and how and how many wounds are more important and potentially more prejudicial.
He did not enter a plea during a brief first court appearance Dec. 17, when he wore shackles and a suicide prevention smock.
Attorney for Rob Reiner’s son resigns but says his client is not guilty of murder under state law
The high-profile private attorney for Nick Reiner was granted a request to be removed from his case Wednesday, but later told reporters that according to California law his client is not guilty of murder in the killing of his parents, Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.
“Circumstances beyond our control and more importantly circumstances beyond Nick’s control have dictated that, sadly, it’s made it impossible to continue our representation of Nick,” lawyer Alan Jackson said as he stood with his team outside a Los Angeles courthouse.
But, Jackson added, after weeks of investigation, “what we’ve learned, and you can take this to the bank, is that pursuant to the laws of this state, pursuant to the law of California, Nick Reiner is not guilty of murder. Print that.”
You wonder what would have caused the attorney to withdraw: perhaps because he won’t get paid [you generally can’t inherit from someone if you kill them.]
According to the NY Times, “it may suggest that the Reiner family — Nick has two siblings — has distanced itself from Mr. Reiner and his legal case, at least financially.”
In other words it could mean that Jake, the older brother, and Romy, the sister, initially hired the high-priced lawyer, but on second thought have decided that they don’t want to spend that money on defending Nick?
On the face of it, this doesn’t seem like a case that a defense attorney can win… but they can certainly run up a huge tab until they don’t win.
Is getting them in a mental institution instead of prison a win? Is a sentence something less than life without the possibility of parole a win?
To me that’s very plausible. A high-profile criminal defense attorney like Jackson isn’t going to waste his time on what may be a lengthy and complicated case if he isn’t going to get paid. And despite his statements to the media, it’s a case that he can’t really “win”, except on the off chance of getting the jury to accept an insanity plea, which isn’t much of a win.
The whole thing is just tragically sad.
On being reminded that Rob Reiner was “Meathead” in the old All in the Family series, I’ve been rewatching old episodes. It was a pretty funny show, and certainly very daring for its time. There’s even an episode that I just saw last night that got into pretty serious matters, where we see the aftermath of Gloria getting sexually assaulted. Man, that was not your typical early-70s sitcom.
In his later years, my mental picture of Rob Reiner is this bearded guy with a constant smile – the very picture of good humour and optimism, and a dedicated activist to progressive causes. Why do terrible things always happen to good people?
tricky situation … spend inheritance money to defend the person who killed your parents? …
I also read into it: it is beyond any doubt that HE did it … we’re not gonna throw a bunch of money to potentially whitewash that SOB
We should be able to figure out whether money was the reason for the attorney resigning, if a less expensive/lower-powered attorney takes over, or if he ends up with a public defender.
He ended up with a public defender.
Very much so, unlike what’s seen in the movies getting a not guilty by reason of insanity is very very difficult in the US. Despite what you may have heard the The M’Naghten Rules (aka not being able to tell right from wrong at the time the crime was committed) are not the criteria used to judge insanity defense in the US.
Of course almost certainly it would take the form of a plea agreement not an actual verdict, so would mean less kudos to the lawyers than a verdict.
My personal read on the attorney’s statement is that it’s a free brag:
“I could totally win this case, but for reasons I can’t stay around. But I could totally win it!”
And if/when the public defender loses, or a plea is reached, he can still crow about his own skills. Basically, if he isn’t getting paid anymore (the current informed speculation) he is still going to recoup some of his expenses and time with free advertising/bragging.
Then again, I don’t have the inside information, maybe there’s some technical issue that the cops/state flubbed, and he thinks the results could get thrown out. 
I mean, can their son afford an attorney? I would wager he has zero money or very little.
My guess about the attorney’s comments about not being guilty of murder have to do with meeting the specific legal definitions of murder in the California legal code. There may be a requirement for “intent to kill” for it to be considered murder. If he was in a psychotic episode and lashed out in uncontrolled rage when he killed them, then it might not meet the definition of murder according to the law. He’s still guilty of killing them, but it would be some crime other than murder.
Upthread it was stated he now has a public defender, but I haven’t verified it yet. My point is that the prior attorney can back out, but still claim HE could have gotten them off, whether it be on a technical error, or, as @filmore stated, on some other serious crime that isn’t technically murder under the exact wording of the law.
Again, my main point is that in withdrawing from the case he’s taking the time to trumpet his own abilities and skills, and downplay his own reasons for leaving the case.
The public defender is strictly a placeholder who stepped in to ask for a continuance after Alan Jackson dropped out. Nick Reiner may hire another lawyer to continue the case.