Adventures in the Law: Guilty of Oversharing

We all know people who insist on telling us more about themselves than we want or need to know. It’s called oversharing. We dislike it because it’s tedious and annoying to listen to, and we’re uncomfortable hearing personal, even intimate, details that are best kept private.

But did it ever occur to you that oversharing can be downright dangerous for the person who does it? Here’s a case that proves the point dramatically.

Students arriving for class at a culinary institute in 2018 were met with an anything-but-appetizing sight: the dead body of the chef—we’ll call him Darrell--sprawled on the kitchen floor. He had been shot twice with a nine-millimeter Glock handgun. The spent shell casings lay beside him.

Later that day, the police informed Darrell’s wife—we’ll call her Nellie--of his death. Questioned, Nellie reported that it had been a typical morning. Darrell rose early, fed the chickens, walked the dog, showered, dressed, and left for work a little after seven. Nellie had, she said, remained home all morning.

But wait! Surveillance video showed Nellie’s minivan going to and from the culinary institute area that very morning. Confronted with the video, Nellie claimed to have no memory of being in the area but theorized she may have gone for coffee and to make notes for her writing. She was, after all, the author of self-published romance novels. Also, she speculated, might not the shock of Darrell’s death have caused her confusion?

Should the police suspect Nellie? True, the video contradicted her initial claim of being home, but she had a credible explanation. True also, she was the beneficiary of Darrell’slife insurance policy, but wasn’t that the typical arrangement between spouses?

But the police did suspect Nellie, at least enough to keep digging. Why? Because Nellie was a world-class oversharer. In addition to writing romance novels, she was an inveterate blogger, revealing her thoughts on a wide range of topics, big and small. A favorite topic was murder, especially husband murder. Nellie had written all about it in an essay straightforwardly titled How to Murder Your Husband.

In the essay, Nellie emphasized that the wife must be “very clever” to get away with the deed. That piqued the interest of the police, prompting them to investigate Nellie’s online purchase history. Lo and behold, she had bought a Glock handgun! It wasn’t the actual murder weapon, which was never found, but it was the same make and model.

Even more interestingly, Nellie had bought a “ghost gun” assembly kit, used for assembling an unregistered and untraceable gun. What’s more, she had gone on eBay to acquire an extra handgun slide and barrel. She could swap, mix, and match the parts of her Glock, gun kit, and extra slide and barrel!

Nellie’s explanation? The gun kit and parts were research for a planned story of a woman who slowly acquired them so she could kill her abusive husband without detection.

Unpersuaded by her explanation, the authorities charged Nellie with Darrell’smurder. At her trial, prosecutors weren’t allowed to discuss the infamous uxoricide essay. But when Nellie shocked everyone by taking the stand in her own defense—why pass up a chance to share?--prosecutors knew from her writings just what to ask. One question was whether she believed that everyone was capable of murder. Without hesitation, Nellie responded that she “absolutely” believed it.

Nellie was convicted of second-degree murder by a circuit court jury.

Next time you’re tempted to share, remember Nellie.