Were there any signs of foul play in the deaths of Rob Reiner and his wife?

Checked on December 21, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Executive summary

The available reporting shows clear, corroborated signs of foul play: law enforcement treated the deaths as a homicide, the couple suffered stab wounds/multiple sharp force injuries, and investigators arrested and later charged their son in connection with the killings [1] [2] [3]. While early statements emphasized an active investigation and limited public detail, subsequent medical examiner findings and charging documents tie the cause of death to violent, intentional acts rather than natural causes or accident [4] [2].

1. The scene and the initial police response point to a criminal investigation

Los Angeles Fire Department personnel and LAPD officers responded to a medical-aid/death call at the Reiners’ Brentwood home; the LAPD’s Robbery-Homicide Division opened a death investigation that police later described as an “apparent homicide,” signaling investigators treated the scene as the site of a violent crime from the start [5] [1] [6].

2. Autopsy and medical examiner findings identify sharp-force trauma as the cause

The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office reported the official cause of death as “multiple sharp force injuries” for both Rob and Michele Reiner, a forensic conclusion consistent with homicide by stabbing and not consistent with noncriminal explanations provided in early chaotic news cycles [2] [7].

3. Law enforcement quickly developed a suspect and made an arrest

Although initial LAPD remarks emphasized an ongoing probe without naming suspects, reporting from multiple outlets documents that investigators identified and arrested the couple’s son, Nick Reiner, and that prosecutors later charged him with first‑degree murder and alleged use of a knife — actions that reflect investigative findings linking a suspect to the killings [3] [8] [9].

4. Corroborating reporting traces a timeline and investigative steps

News organizations reported a sequence in which family members discovered the deaths, detectives executed a search warrant, the Robbery-Homicide unit and other task forces located the suspect, and the coroner’s office completed autopsies; those steps are standard in homicides and strengthen the factual chain from discovery to charging [10] [11] [8].

5. What remains unsettled in public reporting and where caution is warranted

Reporting contains factual gaps that remain important: precise timing of death (whether late Saturday or early Sunday), the full forensic narrative of what transpired inside the home, and whether any motive beyond what prosecutors allege will be proven at trial; outlets explicitly note investigators are “waiting on the coroner” for timing and that prosecutorial decisions about penalty remain undecided [4] [8] [2]. These are limits of current public record rather than signs that foul play did not occur.

6. Alternative viewpoints, media posture and family privacy considerations

Media outlets initially hedged details while family spokespeople asked for privacy, and some outlets emphasized the familial connection and the suspect’s prior struggles — context that can shape public perception; readers should note the difference between verified forensic findings (medical examiner, homicide division statements) and ancillary reporting about family history or behavior at a party the night before, which reporters cited from sources but which are not the forensic basis for cause of death [10] [12]. The rapid news cycle and competing outlets create incentives to publish early but sometimes incomplete information; however, the core forensic and investigative facts reported across multiple reputable outlets consistently indicate homicide by stabbing [1] [2] [3].

7. Bottom line: the publicly reported evidence shows foul play

Based on the LAPD’s homicide investigation, the medical examiner’s determination of multiple sharp‑force injuries, and the arrest and murder charges filed against the Reiners’ son, the facts in available reporting indicate the deaths were the result of criminal violence rather than accidental or natural causes; outstanding questions remain for investigators and courts to resolve about timing, motive and full factual context [6] [2] [8].

Want to dive deeper?
What evidence did the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner cite in determining 'multiple sharp force injuries' for Rob and Michele Reiner?
What legal steps and evidentiary standards will the prosecution need to meet to prove first‑degree murder in the Reiner case?
How have media organizations balanced speed and accuracy in reporting on high‑profile homicide investigations like the Reiners' deaths?