Does it matter now, 36 years later, that Robert Wagner is a 'person of interest' in Natalie Wood's death?
I remember the headlines when it happened – Natalie Wood drowned, and the only people on the boat were Wagner, Christopher Walken, and the captain of the boat.
Now, 36 years later, Wagner is identified as a “person of interest”.
Does it matter? Even if they have reason to arrest him, what evidence can their be that hasn’t been looked at a hundred times before? Is this new development happening because there is actually something new, or is it all for some TV show?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
14 Answers
He has been a person of interest off and on since her death.
I see no reason for them to keep reopening the case.
6 Years of investigating after re-opening the case and this is what they come up with?
He has been a “suspect” all along. This is just a publicity stunt by the LA County Sheriff.
Technically there is no statute of limitations on murder. But unless there is some new evidence, it is unlikely that anything will come of this announcement. And let’s face it…Wagner is 87 years old. What are they going to do to him? He would most likely be dead before any trial could be done.
I think it matters. I believe in seeking justice, regardless if the case is cold or hot. I always thought Wagner was involved anyway.
Of course it matters.
If evidence is discovered that Wagner was instrumental in Natalie’s death then like everyone else he has to be brought to justice.
Cold Cases are throwing up murderers and criminals all the time and they are getting their come uppance. The sad thing is that they have been walking around scot free for all the years following their crimes unlike the poor victims.
As has been said Wagner has been in the limelight off and on ever since the death of Natalie so it is difficult to see how irrefutable evidence has or can be found to charge Wagner with anything concerning her death.
The only other evidence I can possibly think of is forensic evidence because when Natalie died forensic science was virtually non existent.
I don’t think they should ever close the file on a murder case. New evidence may turn up or new technology such as DNA testing might identify the culprit. I don’t want murderers to think they can ever sleep easy in their beds and I don’t want the families of murder victims to think the police will ever close an unsolved case.
Are you saying we should let him get away with it?
I agree with @seawulf575 – yes, murder is a crime, but they’re not going to send a 87-year-ol ex-movie actor to jail.
It depends on the evidence. If it’s something like they found a drop of blood that was hers, it wouldn’t mean much of anything. She could’ve cut herself.
Now if it is that there was a witness to come forward, then what is this persons motive? Why didn’t they say anything years ago.
So unless it’s huge evidence that they can directly point to him and shows proof that she was murdered, than that is another story. But I believe the only thing they determined was that she drowned. I don’t know how you prove someone drowned someone else unless you can prove they were knock out and thrown in the water. There were other people on the boat. They say Wagner was the last person to see her alive. If she was murdered and it wasn’t Wagner, would they fess up to have been the last person to seeing her alive?
Apparently there’s an expose TV program about it tomorrow night so sounds like just trying to drum up interest.
Christopher Walken? He was present.
And he is 75 yrs old now and not saying much?
He knows more than he is letting on?
Response moderated (Spam)
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
