Maureen Maher

To help the jury understand why Jodi had trouble remembering, the defense called Dr. Richard Samuels, a clinical psychologist who tested Jodi for PTSD.

Samuels concluded that Jodi suffered amnesia from the trauma of the attack.

But the prosecution insisted that Samuel's diagnosis was flawed, because when he examined Jody three years ago, she still maintained the intruder story.

During this three-hour interview, Jodi told us a tale of secret intimacy.

Dr. Stuart Kleinman is a forensic psychiatrist and consultant for 48 hours.

Jodi Arias claims she not only has no memory of stabbing Travis more than two dozen times and slitting his throat, but she also has no memory of altering the scene. It wasn't until after driving hundreds of miles into the desert that her mental fog apparently lifted, and she suddenly realized she had done something horribly wrong.

Yes.

Martinez hoped that by exposing Jody as a liar, he would discredit her with the jury. And once again presented clips from Jody's 48 Hours interviews. Travis's family deserves to know what happened.

That's a very creative way of saying it. It found an outlet. The drama of masked intruders.

Am I allowed to tell you what I'm trying to say? And Jodi displayed that same tenacity during her 18 days on the witness stand.

That's right.

Throughout the heated cross-examination, Martinez vigorously attacked Jodi's story.

I don't know. But to save their client's life, the defense tried to destroy the only thing left of Travis Alexander, his reputation.

And ultimately, a desperate escape.

Where the entire time that Jodi Arias' fate hung in the balance in court, her defense was on a mission to save her life. Jodi had to make a choice. By proving Travis left Jodi no choice but to defend herself.

Jodi's answer, an accusation of her own.

Jodi now claimed there was a dark side to Travis, and that she lied to cover up the truth about domestic abuse and their relationship.

It was a challenging defense, one that, in addition to her story of intruders, Jodi may have been considering when she spoke with 48 Hours just after her arrest. Was he ever abusive to you in any way?

Did you show the physical signs of it?

But Jodi testified to several incidents of alleged abuse. And he body slammed me on the floor at the foot of his bed.

Defense attorney Kirk Nurmi even had Jody display her injuries to the jury.

There is no record of Jody reporting this abuse. And his friends, Chris and Sky Hughes, say that is not the Travis they knew.

She's making it up as she's going along. And they say Jodi's most appalling lie came next.

I wish it was a lie. Prosecutor Martinez wasn't buying it either.

Trial attorney Linda Kenney-Bodden says if the defense could not prove Jody's allegations, they would come back to haunt her.

Yes, I do. To convince jurors that Jody was a battered woman, her attorney, Jennifer Wilmot, called domestic violence expert Alice LaViolette, who testified for several days.

LaViolette testified that Jody and Travis's relationship was abusive both verbally... Does he call her names like bitch? Yes.

As a defense attorney, how would you use this relationship between the two of them?

Do you feel a need? The prosecutor was anything but soft during heated cross-examination.

As it turned out, that incredible story was an incredible lie.

More layers of Arias' complicated psyche were peeled away when the state called its expert witness, Dr. Janine DiMarte.

DeMarte also dismissed defense claims that Jody suffered memory loss from post-traumatic stress.

Instead, DeMarte testified that tests she administered suggest Jody may have a borderline personality disorder.

The prosecutor said Jodi's desire to be with Travis had no bounds, and she would stop at nothing to get what she wanted. Her motivation for this was that she just wanted him. You don't think she could have just snapped?

By continuing to have sex with Jody on and off for at least nine months after they broke up, Bodden says Travis may have unknowingly sent Jody mixed signals.

Dr. Stuart Kleinman says obsession can have dangerous consequences.

For the families of Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander, enduring the trial was a trial in itself. What are we looking at here?

At her trial, Jodi Arias told the world a new story.

Trial attorney Linda Kenney-Bodden knows the price both families paid.

It was an unthinkable crime, as Travis's siblings, Samantha and Steven, told us in 2008.

The family of Jodi Arias has had to endure their own torment. First, watching as she was cast as a cold-blooded killer.

and then hearing Jody tell the world that she has been abused her entire life.

Yes.

Do you think jurors are impacted by family who are in the courtroom, their reaction to, say, crime scene photos or even testimony by the defendant? I think they are.

Jury expert Richard Gabriel, who has worked with the defense teams for Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson, says jurors are able to separate themselves from courtroom drama.

And during her 18 days on the stand, Bodden says Jody thought she could win the mercy of the jury.

weaving a tale of fear and abuse.

Travis's friends, Chris and Skye Hughes, believe Jodi relished her months in the spotlight. She enjoyed it.

Jody may have felt there was no question she would be found innocent, but the jurors had some questions of their own, over 200 questions read by the judge.

Arizona is only one of three states that allows jurors to ask questions.

In the end, both sides agreed. It came down to one question. Do you believe Jodi Arias?

I was loyal to him. We go back to the beginning, returning to our first meetings with Jody for insight into the mind of a killer. Is it at all possible, at all possible, that that day that you were together, you had a fight, you had an argument, and you just had enough?

But for the family and friends of Travis Alexander, there was no debate, and there never had been. There was only one verdict, one punishment appropriate for Jodi Arias.

Justice and what it would finally look like would depend on just which Jodi Arias the jury in this tense Phoenix courtroom ultimately bought into.

Through 18 days of her testimony, the world had witnessed the many faces of Jodi Arias.

For Travis Alexander's loved ones, Jodi Arias is nothing but a fake.

The stories told by the 32-year-old California waitress were consistent with just one thing, a defendant who lied from the start. My mom began to carry a wooden spoon in her purse. To family.

To the police. Absolutely not. And to 48 Hours. How do you feel about being accused of this crime?

It seems like a lifetime ago.

But it was only four years.

Then that story evaporated in the Arizona desert. What was left was an admission. And that's when you shot him in the face, right?

And an excuse.

For those who loved him, the thought that Travis Alexander somehow had it coming to him was the final crime against a murdered man.

After three days of deliberations, there was a verdict.

Guilty of first degree murder, the highest charge the jury had. The death penalty was now on the table. Jodi Arias seemed shocked, holding back tears of sadness. while Travis's family could not hold back their tears of joy.

A week after the verdict, The sentencing phase begins with the prosecutor trying to convince the jury Jodi Arias deserves death.

The first decision comes quickly. The jury rules the murder was especially cruel, clearing the way for the penalty phase. Is this your true verdict, so say you want it all? The jury heard from those who love Travis Alexander, his brother Stephen.

His sister, Samantha. Travis was not shy. He was full of life. And the jury heard from the defense that Arias would testify one more time.

That should be next week, when we may also find out whether Jodi Arias lives in this Arizona prison for a minimum of 25 years or dies here. Four years ago, she seemed to sense her fate.

And after her guilty verdict, Arias seemed almost wistful in talking to a local reporter. I believe death is the ultimate freedom, so I'd rather just have my freedom as soon as I can get it. Freedom wasn't an option for Travis Alexander. He was home in Riverside, California, His image, silent and cold, carved in stone.

He had a girlfriend who he was having a relationship with. but he was still having you on the side?

And soon, we'll see if Jodi Arias gets her wish, joining three other women on Arizona's death row, and perhaps making one final headline, becoming the first woman executed in that state since 1930.

Like Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson before her, Jodi Arias captured the attention of the country. Arias pelted these lies.

Jodi Arias. Jodi Arias. Looking back at these interviews, it would appear that Jodi thought she could fool everyone.

But in the end, Jodi Arias could not have been more wrong.

I'm Maureen Maher, tonight on 48 Hours, unraveling the lies of Jodi Arias.

It all started in 2008. When Travis Alexander was found dead in his bathroom, the first question homicide investigator Esteban Flores had was who. When did you first hear the name Jodi Arias?

Now, four and a half years after Jody Arias was arrested and charged with first-degree murder... Are we ready for the jury? ...the question that needed to be answered was why.

Prosecutor Juan Martinez wasted no time exposing the jury to the brutal reality of this homicide.

When I first walked through this crime scene in 2008, I was struck by the echoes of the extraordinary struggle that had taken place here. And it was the evidence of that struggle collected at the scene that spoke volumes to the jury.

We introduced you to Jodi Arias back in 2009, when she sat down to be interviewed by 48 Hours shortly after being arrested and charged with the murder of her ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander. Since then, she's become a national sensation, the focus of newspaper and magazine profiles, and the subject of 24-hour cable news coverage.

One by one, Mesa County Medical Examiner Kevin Horn listed each of Travis Alexander's devastating wounds.

Criminal attorney Linda Kenny-Bodden, who worked on the defense teams of Casey Anthony and Phil Spector, has seen more than her share of murders, but few like this. This showed that she was an incredibly angry young woman.

Why?

Since her arrest in Wairika, California, in 2008, Jody has always insisted that she did not viciously murder Travis Alexander. But her details of how he died have changed repeatedly.

In the 25 years that it's been on the air, this is the first time a 48-hours interview has been used as evidence in a death penalty trial. I was hit on the back of the head.

Couldn't keep my life straight. But Bodden says that her experience with other defendants suggests that the story Jody told 48 hours may contain elements of the truth.

Jody's various stories aside, the prosecution says there are critical pieces of evidence that speak for themselves.

I met Jodi Arias at the Estrella jail four and a half years ago when she agreed to tell CBS News her story of how Travis Alexander had been murdered, an interview which for the first time in the history of 48 Hours was used as evidence in a death penalty trial. Just give me the gist of what you were doing here in this place today.

After nine days and 20 witnesses, Martinez believed his case against Jodi Arias was ironclad. The state may call its next witness.

Now, despite all the lies and deceitful behavior that the court has heard.

He's done so much for me. The defense will have to convince the jury that on the day Travis died, it was actually Jodi Arias who was the victim.

Even in jail awaiting trial, Jodi Arias had little trouble keeping herself in the spotlight and caught the attention of the media when she won a jailhouse Christmas singing competition. Well, I appreciate your vote. Thank you very much.

Serious, please stand to be sworn. And when the defense finally presented its case, Jody took the spotlight again, taking the stand to tell her unbelievable story of self-defense. Among those listening were Jody's mother, her aunt, and Travis's family.

According to trial lawyer Linda Kenny-Bodden, putting a defendant like Jodi Arias on the stand can be extremely problematic.

Jodi's memory of how Travis allegedly attacked her was striking, and yet she was at a loss for words when asked to explain her actions.

There's got to be something at the heart of that evidence that they've got.

There's got to be something at the heart of that evidence that they've got.

Yeah.

There's got to be something at the heart of that evidence that they've got.

Maggie began to understand how strong the bonds were between her mother and her Aunt Jane.

After the horror, Barbara got on with her life. But there were still unanswered questions. No one has known what happened to Jane that night for 36 years. Jane's case became inactive in 1970, when John Collins was convicted of Karen Bynum's murder. He thinks there was a miscarriage of justice. Ramsland, who's been researching the case, has been corresponding with Collins.

He's been in a state prison now for the last 35 years. Has he ever denied or admitted to anything?

On that one point, at least, Ramsland tends to believe him.

The killer had taken the time to cover up Jane's body and carefully arrange her belongings around her.

Detective Eric Schroeder is one of many investigators who also believe Jane's case stands alone.

For years, Jane Mixer's murder has bothered him.

Detective Schroeder was convinced that Jane's case should be taken out of cold storage. At the same time Schroeder and his colleagues began to quietly reinvestigate Jane's murder, Maggie was still writing her book. and struggling. It was scary, very, very gruesome.

Michigan State Police Detective Eric Schroeder was deeply touched by the story of Jane Mixer.

So in 2001, when Schroeder was put in charge of cataloging evidence from old cases, he jumped at the chance to finally do Jane justice.

He hoped to find new evidence.

Evidence that could not be detected in the 60s. DNA.

The lab also looked for telltale DNA on Jane's clothing, the ligature, and a bloody towel found under her head.

They called with startling news. The lab did find incriminating DNA, but that DNA did not match John Collins, the man who had been blamed for the murder for more than 30 years. Now, there was a new suspect. I was dumbfounded. It's still an open case.

Maggie Nelson was just finishing her book about Jane. Were you shocked? Oh, yeah. Very shocked.

The lab found that the DNA on Jane's pantyhose matched this man, 62-year-old Gary Leiterman from Goebbels, Michigan, a husband of nearly 28 years, father of two children now grown, and a retired registered nurse.

When police came knocking on his door in November 2004, he says he thought nothing of it. You were leading a pretty normal life.

After questioning Leiterman for more than three hours, the detectives dropped their bombshell. They told him his DNA was found on crime scene evidence that had been sitting in storage since 1969. What was your reaction?

Back when Jane Mixer was murdered, Leiterman was 26 and single. He had served four years in the Navy and lived in a town about 20 miles from Ann Arbor. Did you know Jane Mixer?

Although the police kept grilling Leiterman, he stuck to his story. Why didn't you believe him?

The police lab could not pinpoint where the DNA came from, but said it was not blood and not semen. It might be something like sweat, saliva, or skin cells. It was enough for police to accuse Leiterman of murder. A 35-year-old murder. What went through your mind?

Leiterman was taken into custody.

At the time, Leiterman's wife was too distraught to speak with us, so their close friend Rachel Kuby stepped in to talk about the man she has known for three decades.

Leiterman had never been accused of a violent crime before.

But he did have one scrape with the law in 2001, when he was caught writing himself fake prescriptions. He had become addicted to painkillers during a bout with kidney stones. He was ordered to a treatment program, which he successfully completed. But his DNA was put in a database. And that is how he now finds himself accused of murder. Did you kill Jane Mixer? No, I did not.

Did you take her body to the cemetery and dump her there? Were you with anyone who did that?

Did you have anything to do with the murder?

Prosecutor Stephen Hiller doesn't buy that and believes Leiterman should pay for this crime. What would be the motive for him to kill a woman?

But there was no physical evidence of sexual assault. And that is just one of the many challenges Hiller faces in this old case.

The state's biggest challenge may be that Gary Leiterman's DNA isn't the only DNA that was found on Jane Mixer. Remember that tiny drop of blood scraped from Jane's left hand back in 1969? Well, the state's own lab says the DNA in that matches another man, a convicted killer named John Ruelas. But the prosecutor insists he is absolutely sure that Ruelas did not murder Jane for one simple reason.

Four and a half.

So how did a four-year-old's blood get on Jay Mixer's hand? The Ruelas and Mixer cases were processed in the lab around the same time, raising the issue of contamination. But Hiller says that didn't happen. All rise, please. As he'll explain in court when he tries Gary Leiderman for murder.

But Leiterman is feeling the stress.

And in this case, even the victim's family has doubts. I wasn't sure they had the right man.

Michigan prosecutor Stephen Hiller says Gary Leiterman got away with murder for 36 years.

A lot of the evidence was saved from this crime scene, correct?

Now in 2005, Leiterman is on trial for the 1969 murder of Jane Mixer.

His friends and family are standing by him.

Jane's sister, Barbara, and her daughter, Maggie, vowed to be here every day and weigh the evidence themselves.

I had to be here.

Jane's father is the first witness called.

David Johnson, the man who was acting in a play the night of the murder, testifies he never spoke with Jane.

What's your theory on what happened in March of 1969?

Hiller believes that Jane got into Leiterman's car and sometime that night he made a sexual advance that ended in murder.

Leiterman, an avid hunter, did own a .22 caliber handgun, but there is no proof that it was the gun that killed Jane.

The old detectives do their best to recall the case.

Evidence they found.

Evidence they lost.

But the crucial issue here concerns evidence they didn't even know existed back then.

DNA.

the new investigators who took over the case testify about the three distinct spots of dna on jane's pantyhose that clearly match gary leiderman here here and here that is correct and they say dna in other places is a partial match a4 would be right there

Those places include three additional spots on the pantyhose, spots on the bloody towel found under Jane's head, and spots on the nylon stocking that was tied around her neck.

Hiller says that is a lot of DNA and proof that Leiterman was there when Jane was murdered, perhaps sweating as he moved her body. Leiterman denies that. But you can't think of any physical contact that you had with her?

Defense attorney Gary Gabry says he can imagine some possibilities.

Or as his expert testifies, DNA could have been transferred in a public place with a chance encounter, like a sneeze.

Hiller dismisses that, saying there is just too much DNA to explain away.

But he cannot so readily dismiss the crime lab's finding that a spot of blood on Jane Mixer's hand matches the DNA of a convicted felon who was only four years old when Jane was murdered.

In 1969, young John Ruelas was living in downtown Detroit, about 40 miles away from where Jane's body was found. Investigators could not connect Ruelas to Gary Leiterman or to Jane Mixer. But remember, the Mixer and Ruelas cases were in the lab around the same time, which begs the question, did something go wrong in the lab?

If a mistake was made with Ruelas, Gabry says the evidence against Leiterman cannot be trusted.

Michigan state officials would not allow 48 hours or any other outsiders inside the lab. This is their video. But Hiller insists he can show that nothing went wrong there. And he calls witness.

After witness.

Who describe the great pains taken at the lab to keep all evidence separate to prevent and catch errors.

Lab supervisor Jeffrey Nye says he retraced every step. In this particular case, you don't believe there's any issue of contamination.

How that happened, the prosecutor says, is lost to history. But he insists the evidence clearly shows that somehow, some way, four-year-old John Ruelas was there. So you honestly believe that John Ruelas was somehow in the vicinity of Jane Mixer back in 1969? That his blood, it's actually John Ruelas' blood?

No question?

With Hiller's case hinging on DNA, defense attorney Gabri highlights other evidence that points away from Gary Leiterman.

That's correct. Leiterman's fingerprints do not match any of the prints still unidentified in the case. Nor did Leiterman own a car, anything like the one seen speeding away the night of the crime.

Leiterman does not take the stand. Two weeks after opening arguments, the jurors begin deliberating. Leiterman's close friend Rachel Kuby says the case against him seems weak.

Still, his family is worried, and even the Mixer family feels sympathy towards them.

Even so, Barbara and Maggie have come to believe that the state has proved its case. What do you think, then, is the most incriminating piece of evidence? It's got to be the DNA. But has the state won over the jury? Gary Leiterman's fate is in their hands.

Maggie Nelson ends her book at the place where Jane Mixer's murder investigation began.

Long before there was a suspect, Maggie brought her mother here.

Now, five years later, they wait anxiously to hear whether a jury believes Gary Leiderman killed Jane 36 years ago.

Leiterman's family also waits, hoping it will be the end of their ordeal.

The jury is swift. It has taken only four hours for them to determine Leiterman's fate.

What did you think when you heard the verdict?

Did it sink in? Because you really had no reaction at all to it.

Jane Mixer was murdered in Ann Arbor, Michigan in March 1969. She was 23. About the same age her niece, Maggie Nelson, was when she resolved to learn all she could about the aunt she never knew.

Six weeks later at his sentencing, Leiterman speaks out in court for the first time. He expresses sympathy for the Mixers.

But he steadfastly denies having anything to do with Jane's murder.

Under Michigan law, his sentence is mandatory.

Even with his fate now sealed, Lederman still finds it hard to accept the jury's verdict.

So have you just accepted it and that's the way it's going to be?

You're fighting?

It will be an uphill battle. But Leiterman's new attorney, Mark Satawa, feels he has a shot.

Prosecutor Stephen Hiller believes justice was served.

After a long journey, Maggie Nelson may have found some peace. Are you still haunted by any of the questions from that night? I think I'm less haunted now. Her search for answers has finally brought Jane Mixer home.

Maggie's mother, Barbara, Jane's older sister by two years, admits there was a pall of silence. Why do you think that is?

But Maggie felt compelled to unravel the mystery surrounding Jane. I was often called her name, but I didn't know much about her. She went to the public library and pored over old newspaper reports, finally learning the details of her aunt's death. Back home, she dug up some of Jane's diaries and began to read. This is from Jane's journal in 1966.

Maggie discovered that Jane was high school valedictorian. Over the objections of school officials, she had given a fiery graduation speech, calling for social justice. She went on to the University of Michigan and was committed to changing the world.

Maggie also tracked down Phil Weitzman, one of the people closest to Jane in 1969, when she was one of just 37 female law students in a class of 420.

She was most passionate about Phil. And early that spring, they were ready to make a big announcement.

Jane planned to go there first, with Phil following a few days later. So she posted a note on a college ride board looking for a lift from Ann Arbor to her home in Muskegon.

Phil says she found a ride with a man named David Johnson.

Jane had told her parents she'd be leaving Ann Arbor around 6 p.m. They expected her to arrive home around 9.30. As the time ticked by and Jane didn't show up, her father grew concerned. Finally, around 11 p.m., he simply couldn't wait around anymore.

Sometime that night, Jane was killed. Jane Mixer's body ended up here in an old out-of-the-way cemetery 14 miles from Ann Arbor. Her killer left her out in the open, atop a grave, just steps from the gate. It wasn't until the next morning that a woman in a nearby home noticed the body and called police.

Detective Donald Bennett, now retired, was sent to investigate.

There was no apparent sexual assaults, but Jane's pantyhose had been pulled down. During the autopsy, Bennett scraped a single drop of blood off Jane's left hand.

Three decades later, that tiny drop of blood would become a controversial piece of evidence. But back in 1969, there was little the police could do with that. So they searched for other clues. On the night of the murder, a green station wagon was seen careening away from the cemetery, but that was never tracked down.

Police searched Jane's dorm room and found a phone book that had a mark next to the name, David Johnson. But that David Johnson, a University of Michigan student, had an ironclad alibi. He was acting on stage the night of the murder and said he never offered Jane a ride. The cops checked out other David Johnsons in the area, as well as Jane's acquaintances, including her fiancé.

Police were stymied and concerned. This crime seemed to fit a disturbing pattern. Jane Mixer was the third young woman in the area to turn up dead in the past two years. And four days later, the pace picked up when a fourth body was found. By the end of July, there were seven victims. Most were brutalized before they were killed.

This is one of the better maps of where each of the murder victims have been found. Her latest book is about serial killers. Back in 1969, she was living near Ann Arbor.

As body after body was recovered, the Mixer family retreated. We were buried within our own little worlds of pain and didn't talk about what was really going on. But the community was clamoring for action.

and being scared. Barbara Nelson says the murder of her little sister Jane left her numb. And it just seemed to me that how could life get any worse?

Forensics expert Katherine Ramsland says back in 1969, the killer seemed unstoppable.

It wasn't until the seventh victim was found that police finally got a break in the case. When they made the arrest, it was a real shocker.

John Collins was an education major at Eastern Michigan University. He was level-headed, smart, on the honor roll.

A witness claims she had seen Collins with Karen Bynum shortly before her death. And while it was widely assumed that he was responsible for all seven murders, Colin stood trial for just one, the Bynum and homicide. He was convicted of first degree murder.

Although John Collins maintained his innocence in Bynum's murder, he was sentenced to life. And he has never been charged with the murders of any of the other six victims. Still, back in 1969, people here in Michigan breathed a collective sigh of relief.

The Mixer family came to accept that Collins killed Jane. And the murders stopped.

Still, Barbara harbored a deep-seated fear from those days, and years later, her daughter Maggie would pick up on it.

But that fear only fueled Maggie's curiosity about her Aunt Jane's short life. Were you surprised or concerned when Maggie started asking questions?

And Maggie, a professor of writing, went for it in a big way. Her research would eventually become a book.

It would also deal with the impact Jane had on other people, including Maggie herself. Her grave has no epitaph.

Neither one spoke a word, but they were about to have the last argument of their marriage.

So the jig was up. The jig was up. In the past, Nancy says Bob never used a weapon against her. But this time, he grabbed a kitchen knife.

Sliced across your hand. Just across my hand. Nancy says she knew she had to get out of the house. She grabbed her keys, her bag, and she ran to the front door. But when she got here, she noticed something strange. The key used to open the door from the inside, which was usually kept in the lock, was missing.

She says at that point, she knew the only other way out of the house was to run down this hall. and out through the garage.

For the first time after 30 years of arguing and alleged abuse, Nancy Seaman says she fought back. I couldn't stop.

It was 16 times with the hatchet. Then with the knife, she stabbed him 21 more times in the back. That is rage.

After the killing, she didn't call the police. She didn't call her sons. Nancy took a shower and managed to get herself to school, just like she always did. How did you compose yourself well enough to go in and teach a bunch of elementary kids?

After school, Nancy began a frantic cleanup, buying bleach, rubber gloves, a tarp, and duct tape. You bleached the floor. You painted the walls. You cleaned up the blood. Yes. Why not just call the cops right away? Why not just pick up the phone and say, oh, my God, I killed my husband. He was trying to kill me.

Tuesday night, just after 10 o'clock, the Farmington Hills police knocked on the front door.

But Bob wasn't far from home. In fact, he was in the driveway, getting away in Nancy's SUV.

No. Days went by.

and the calls to report Bob Seaman missing were pouring in. Strangely, none of them were from his wife, Nancy. The police were baffled, and they returned to the house on Briarwood Court.

Lisa Ortlieb is the prosecutor on the case. They noticed that it had an odor of bleach and paint. It smelled nice. Why did you lie to the police when they asked you on more than one occasion, where is your husband? Do you know where he is?

On Wednesday afternoon, Nancy went to the store again and purchased more gloves and a bottle of air freshener. Shortly after she returned home... The police came back again to press Nancy about where they might find her missing husband.

There, near the bottle of air freshener, wrapped in a blue tarp, was Bob's body. The fight over the cars and every fight of their 30-year marriage was over. Soon, both sons received the most disturbing phone calls of their lives.

Why did you think then that your father had killed your mother?

From the moment of her arrest, Nancy began to launch her controversial defense. She had the police photograph her body. These evidence photos show numerous bruises on her arms and legs. Nancy has put her fate in the hands of defense attorney Larry Kaluzny, a low-key lawyer known for taking high-profile cases.

The case that has torn apart one family will be handled by another, a father-son team.

Todd Kaluzny will try the case alongside his dad.

To bolster their theory, the Kaluzny's hire Dr. Lenore Walker, the country's leading expert on abused women. I had no question that Nancy Seaman was a battered woman. And she says it's not uncommon for a woman to keep her abuse a secret, even for 30 years.

Lisa Ortlieb is not only the prosecutor on the case, she also runs Oakland County's domestic violence unit.

Nancy Seaman's claims of abuse, says Ortlieb, are nothing more than a strategy for her trial.

Finally, on November 29, 2004, the brilliant teacher and mother of two went on trial for first-degree murder.

Lisa Ortlieb firmly believes that it was rage, not fear, that drove Nancy Seaman to kill.

Ortlieb says that although Nancy was secretly plotting to leave Bob, he was actually planning to divorce her first. In this letter, Bob writes, you alone will decide how amicably or bitterly we divide the property. The prosecution says it was Nancy who had the temper. She was stinging over Bob's relationship with the Dumbletons, especially Julie Dumbleton.

She called my house and threatened my son and threatened me. Julie says she and Bob never had an affair. But Nancy's jealousy led to a shouting match at Bob's business. She was angry. She called me a name. She was yelling. There was one more clue to what the prosecution says took place in the garage, the substantial marital assets. Remember Bob's conversation with his brother Dennis?

So you had suggested just give her half and be done with it.

Dennis advised Bob that he would be entitled to half of whatever Nancy had, including her brand-new condo.

The prosecution says this was premeditated murder, that it happened on Sunday and not Monday morning, as Nancy says. The compelling proof? Bob Seaman was found dead wearing the same clothes he was last seen alive in on Sunday evening. And that first Home Depot tape was not the most damning. Let's go to Tuesday, May 11th. The prosecution presents a second store video recorded two days later.

Ortlieb says this time Nancy stole a hatchet identical to the one used to kill Bob.

Here, store cameras record Nancy returning that stolen hatchet, using her Mother's Day receipt in an effort to erase all traces of her original purchase.

But the most crucial evidence was about to unfold. The boys who grew up under the same roof will tell two completely different stories. Is your mother lying about the abuse? Yes. Is your brother lying about the abuse? Yes. Do you believe in any way that it was self-defense for your mother?

Is Jeff lying?

Just four years earlier, a camera captured one of Nancy Seaman's proudest moments as she accepted an award for doing what she loved, teaching.

The blood feud boiling between Nancy Seaman's two sons is about to take center stage in their mother's murder trial.

Jeff Seaman will testify for the prosecution.

Greg Seaman will testify for the defense.

The boys clash over every point in their mother's story, starting with what happened after their father lost his job.

And they have conflicting explanations for what brought their mother to Home Depot that Mother's Day night.

But nowhere is the divide between the brothers deeper than over their mother's explosive allegation that she was a battered wife.

But now, many cameras are fixed on Nancy Seaman.

Did you personally see bruises and cuts and contusions on your mom?

For years, Greg says his mother would come up with excuses for her injuries.

Jeff admits he did see bruises.

And he says his mother only mentioned abuse once she decided to leave, a move Jeff believes she devised to gain an advantage in the upcoming divorce.

The award-winning teacher known for her patience and kindness is accused of a horrific crime.

You're saying she was laying the groundwork? Yes. You think she was making it up?

Nancy's sons couldn't agree on what they saw, so her colleagues are called to the stand.

When I saw the black eye, yes. Paulette Schleder is one of Nancy's oldest friends.

She was afraid. Paulette recalls a disturbing conversation she had with Nancy just two months before Bob's death.

Now it will be up to Nancy to convince the jury she was a battered wife and not a murderer.

She tells the jury she suffered 94 attacks at the hands of her husband. It was hard to think about them.

The hatchet murder of her husband, Bob Seaman.

I didn't realize there were so many of them.

In the most dramatic moment of the trial, Nancy demonstrates how she defended her life that day.

She tries to explain what turned the attack into an overkill.

The bleaching, the painting, scrubbing the crime scene clean, even her attempt to put the hatchet back in the store.

That was Nancy doing what she had always done.

But after two days, Nancy says she realized there was no fixing Bob.

Now, Nancy Seaman, alleged battered woman, comes face-to-face with a domestic violence prosecutor.

You don't think you're guilty of murder?

When I said I was hitting him, it was fast. Finally, the prosecutor asks Nancy if the situation was as bad as she alleges, why didn't she go for help?

So was Nancy Seaman abused or not? The defense calls the expert, Dr. Lenore Walker. Dr. Walker should have been the star witness, but Michigan law will only allow her to describe the characteristics of battered women in general terms.

But had she been able to testify about Nancy?

But will the jury see Nancy Seaman as the assaulted? Or the assailant? Which picture of Nancy Seaman will the jury believe?

The warm-hearted teacher? Or the cold-blooded killer?

The answer, according to Nancy, has been kept well hidden for so long.

As proof, Lisa Ortley points to the very bruises Nancy said were evidence she'd been battered.

He lied. Seven months after Bob Seaman was killed, the case of the People v. Nancy Seaman is in the hands of the jury. It took Nancy 30 years to end her marriage. It takes the jury less than five hours to decide on the rest of her life. The verdict is guilty of murder in first degree. Despite her emotions on the stand, Nancy shows no reaction to the verdict.

Behind these private gates, inside this sprawling home, Nancy Seaman says she lived the life of a battered woman. Was your father abusive to your mother? Yes. Verbally? Yes. Physically? Yes. The case will turn on their two sons, Greg and Jeff Seaman.

One month later, Nancy Seaman goes to court one more time. Only Greg comes to stand by his mother as she is sentenced.

In a stunning move from the bench, the judge calls Jeff a liar.

Judge McDonald goes on to sympathize with the teacher convicted of murder.

In the end, Nancy Seaman traded a life of privilege behind these private gates for a life behind prison bars. And saddest of all, the family Nancy says she tried so hard to keep together would turn out more broken than ever.

What they say about their parents' marriage and the life they all shared will condemn their mother or free her. How can there be two totally different opinions from two guys who are brothers who are only just a couple years apart?

To find the part of the truth that nobody disputes, you have to go back more than 30 years. That's when Nancy first met Bob. It was 1972. No one could argue with love at first sight.

The two made a brilliant couple, literally. Nancy was valedictorian of her high school class.

And Bob was an engineer on his way up, first at Ford Motor Company and later at automotive manufacturer BorgWarner. Was he considered a brilliant engineer?

Diane and Rick Cox are close friends of the couple.

From the beginning, there were cracks in the marriage. She says they were newlyweds when the first incident occurred.

What are you thinking at this point? You've been married for two weeks.

That storm blew over, and soon there were two reasons to stay. The boys. First, Jeff, and then Greg. From the outside looking in, how would you describe the Siemens? We were the perfect family.

But Bob's controlling and explosive nature became more and more evident.

Would he call her names?

It's kind of hard to believe that never in all the time that he was saying all these condescending and nasty things to you that you never stood up for yourself.

Once, Nancy did call the police when Bob allegedly struck her, but no charges were filed. Bob would never forgive or forget. As the boys grew up, Nancy wanted them to love and admire Bob. Both kids became engineers, just like their father.

For the first 20 years, Nancy says the physical abuse was sporadic, maybe one or two incidents a year. But in 1995, there was a new strain on the marriage. Bob lost his high-paying job just as Nancy was about to launch her own career as an award-winning elementary school teacher.

Meanwhile, Bob decided he would pour his heart into something that had always made him happy, baseball. He opened a batting cage for kids called the Upper Deck. Was your mom happy about the batting cage business?

Nancy felt the real wedge between them was a happier family Bob met through the business, the Dumbletons.

Bob coached their kids. Their mother, Julie, volunteered to be his bookkeeper. But Nancy felt there may have been more to that relationship. Do you think your father was having an affair with Julie Dumbleton?

Whatever the relationship was with Julie, Nancy says her husband's behavior toward her was becoming increasingly violent. On June 29, 2001, Nancy says Bob threw a chair at her, sending her to the hospital. Why didn't you reach out at that point and say, I'm being abused, somebody's hurting me?

So why didn't you?

When Jeff married his college sweetheart, Becca, in August of 2001, Bob and Nancy's relationship was more fractured than ever. Yet Nancy hoped that things would somehow work out between them.

But the marriage was not about to end in divorce. Did you go to Home Depot with the intention of buying a hatchet and coming home and murdering your husband?

Did you plan to murder Bob?

The Seamans were a family who had more cars than people, an expensive Ferrari, a classic Shelby. But it was a fight over a broken down 1989 Mustang that would be the point of no return, not only for husband and wife, but also for father and son.

Restoring that old Mustang was meant to be a bonding project between Greg and his dad.

It was just a car, but it was also a symbol of a disintegrating family, which crumbled even more when Bob eventually gave the Mustang to the Dumbletons. Were you jealous of the Dumbletons? No.

Why is it that the falling out with Greg had such an impact on the relationship with Bob? If Bob beating you up and smacking you around verbally and physically wasn't enough to... I couldn't stand to see him hurt my son. Nancy still wasn't willing to give up on the marriage. And to live under the same roof, Nancy says she planned her mornings to get out of the house before her husband was awake.

So Bob found another way to express his frustration.

40 notes in one day on fixing the dishwasher, emptying the trash, even about spending time together. By February of 2004, Nancy had enough. So you devised a plan, an escape hatch, so to speak, and you pulled the boys in on it. Yes, I did. She secretly purchased a brand-new condo and slowly began to box up her things. She told Bob the condo was for Greg.

Meanwhile, Bob was making his own plans to leave the marriage.

Bob went to Arizona to consult with his brother, Dennis, about his options.

It was Mother's Day weekend 2004. Bob flew back to Michigan, excited about the prospect of starting over.

Nancy was spending Mother's Day at Jeff and Becca's house. On Sunday evening, everyone returned to the house on Briarwood Court. Immediately, a blow-up ensued. Nancy wanted to borrow Bob's Ford Explorer to pick up Greg from college. He said no.

Flight starts brewing, and Becca and Jeff leave. They left me. Jeff and Becca left at about 7 p.m. At 7.37, surveillance video from a nearby Home Depot shows Nancy buying a hatchet. She claims the hatchet was to chop up a stump in the backyard.

Nancy says she came home from the store and went to bed. On May 10th, the day after Mother's Day, Nancy says she got up at about 5.30 a.m., got dressed, and was getting ready to make her lunch. But there was no avoiding Bob that morning. According to Nancy, by the time she got down to the kitchen, he was already sitting at the counter.