When Rob and Michele Reiner's ME reports were released early on what did they say
Executive summary
Early medical‑examiner information about Rob and Michele Singer Reiner was posted publicly by the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner and showed the couple died of "multiple sharp force injuries" — details that were later removed when a court granted a security hold at the LAPD’s request; the department said it sought the sealing to ensure investigators saw important information before media release [1] [2] [3].
1. What the initial medical‑examiner postings said
When the county initially posted information, the Medical Examiner’s office and subsequent reporting described the cause of death for both Rob and Michele Reiner as multiple sharp‑force injuries, and death certificates confirming that finding were released and reported by outlets that obtained them [1] [2] [4].
2. Additional early details published about timing and injuries
Some early ME details reported that the deputy coroner wrote the Reiners died from their injuries "within minutes," while the exact date and time the injuries were inflicted were listed as "unknown" on portions of the medical records cited by national outlets [1] [5].
3. How those early findings were then retracted or scrubbed
On Dec. 24 the Medical Examiner’s office said it received a court order initiated by the LAPD placing a "security hold" on the case files, and the county removed previously posted cause‑of‑death information and blocked further public posting of reports, photos or notes until further notice after a Superior Court judge signed the order [4] [6] [7].
4. The LAPD’s stated rationale and the prosecutor/investigative context
The LAPD told reporters it sought the sealing to "ensure detectives from Robbery‑Homicide Division learned of important information surrounding their deaths before the media and the public," framing the request as investigative necessity rather than an effort to obscure findings, and prosecutors have since accused the couple’s son of fatally stabbing them — an allegation reflected in multiple news accounts [3] [8] [9].
5. What remains public and the limits of available reporting
While initial publicly posted content and the death certificates made clear the cause was sharp‑force injuries, those records have been removed from the Medical Examiner’s site and the full autopsy reports have been blocked from release, meaning detailed forensic findings and any narrative about timing, sequence, defensive wounds, or other medical subtleties are not available for independent verification in the public record at this time [2] [10] [11].
6. How outlets characterized the early disclosures and subsequent sealing
National outlets reported the county had briefly published cause‑of‑death information and then pulled it after receiving the court order; coverage ranged from straightforward summaries of the cause and the sealing to explicit notes that the sealing was initiated by the LAPD and approved by a judge, with some outlets emphasizing investigatory justification and others emphasizing the sudden removal from public view [4] [6] [12].
7. Reasonable cautions and competing viewpoints
The LAPD’s stated motive — protecting investigatory integrity — is documented in press statements and court filings reported by mainstream outlets, while critics of secrecy point out that sealing high‑profile records fuels speculation; because the autopsy reports are now under court order, fuller medical details are not currently available in the public record and any claims beyond the posted-and‑then‑removed cause of death cannot be independently confirmed from the sources reviewed [3] [10] [7].