16-year-old Sarah Johnson shot parents Diane and Alan

Sarah Johnson grew into the type of teenager parents fear. Authorities learned that the 16-year-old had a stormy relationship with her mother, and she was taking anti-depressants. We're left to ask ourselves: Was Sarah a typical, defiant teenager with the normal trials of being a teen? Had Alan and Diane been oppressive parents, making oppressive rules for Sarah? Or was Sarah's depression or other diagnosable condition like oppositional defiance disorder at the core of the family's issues? Might an alternate or additional medication been beneficial?

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

Bruno Santos continued to date Sarah despite her parents wishes. The 19-year-old could've been charged with a statutory offence considering  Sarah's age. This alone would've been enough incentive to keep me away from a 16-year-old, but young love (intense hormones) complicates things and can be a difficult obstacle. This relationship reminded me of the relationship at the core of the episode Head Games (s09e10). A young Candra Torres had married her husband Julio when she was merely 15 years old. Julio Torres was already 20, and Candra's father had a very different reaction to the couple's dubious relationship than Alan Johnson. Candra's father encouraged the marriage when "he could see the relationship was heating up." I'm not sure many fathers with a 15-year-old daughter would agree marriage was the best solution if a 20-year-old came sniffing around.

Head Games saw Julio Torres killed by predator Tom Brown in what was declared to be a hunting accident. The gun Sarah used to kill her parents was a .264 Winchester Magnum – a bolt-action hunting rifle. Her father was an avid hunter, but their guest house tenant, Mel Speegle, was the rifle's owner. How was it that Sarah knew how to cycle the spent round after shooting her mother? Was the rifle already loaded or did she also know how to load a bolt-action rifle? Had her father been to one to give her this instruction?

Evidence at the Johnsons' Bellevue home

Sarah's story of being in bed when the first shot was fired was quickly called into question when detectives investigated the crime scene. It was determined the first shot was fired at Diane in the master bedroom while she slept. Sarah's account of having her bedroom door closed was immediately proven impossible when blood spatter was found near the hinges of her door. Unless the door was open, there was no way blood could reach this location. Additionally, on the far wall of Sarah's bedroom, police found additional blood evidence from Diane's shooting. This was nearly 30 feet away, from one bedroom, down the hall, to Sarah's – only possible with her door open.

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

The paint and fiber transfer between the pink bathrobe and Sarah's t-shirt was among the key physical evidence of Sarah's involvement. Specifically, green paint particles from Sarah's shirt were found on the bathrobe. And pink fibers from the robe were found on Sarah's t-shirt. This is commonly known as cross-transfer. But, since these were Sarah's own clothes, couldn't the fact that she'd worn the two items together previously led to the transfers? How did investigators know these particle and fiber transfers had taken place recently? Or, since it was suggested Sarah wore the bathrobe backward, were the green paint particles located on the inside of the back of the robe?

The reenactments showed Sarah not donning the gloves until after she'd handled the planted knives and acquired the rifle. Yet the episode did not speak of locating fingerprints. Additional research indicated there were unidentified fingerprints found on the rifle and scope belonging to Mel Speegle. The jury convicted Sarah despite these unknown prints – the additional evidence showing Sarah's role was "overwhelming". The unknown prints did not generate reasonable doubt with the jury. Later, these prints were found to belong to Christopher Hill, a friend and former employee of Mel Speegle. Hill had a logical explanation for his fingerprints on Speegle's rifle and scope. When Sarah's lawyer moved for a retrial, the request was denied. Though Chris Hill didn't have a solid alibi for the morning of the Johnsons' murder, his prints on Speegle's property still didn't change the abundance of evidence pointing to Sarah as her parents' killer.

Sarah's Johnson's master plan

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

A distinction between first- and second-degree murder often involves premeditation. The steps Sarah took to cover up her involvement and throw investigators off suggest planning. But the overall choices made by Sarah on the morning of September 2, 2003, didn't suggest a thorough plan. For example, consider the knives Sarah planted at the scene. There were two kitchen knives on the floor at the foot of her parents' bed, and she placed a third knife on the bed in her brother's bedroom. But what did Sarah believe these knives would mean to investigators? I heard a "gang" angle mentioned, but do gangland killers really visit their victims' kitchen, grab a few knives, and place them at various locations to indicate their involvement?

How about the .25 caliber rounds found in the trashcan? It seems there were about five unspent rounds found with the bathrobe and gloves in the Johnsons' garbage. But what did these signify? Again, if this was an attempt to mislead investigators, how? Was this supposed to put them on the hunt for a .25 caliber handgun? Why would the real killer dispose of rounds to a firearm that wasn't used in the crime? If the plan was to simply confuse investigators, Sarah probably accomplished this – if only briefly.

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

Disposing of evidence in the trashcan is either a lapse in criminal judgement, or another misguided attempt to thwart the investigation. Sarah must've thought one of two things: She believed (or at least hoped) the trash – and the evidence within – would be taken away before it was located by police. Or, her fabricated tale meant to suggest: The intruder donned her pink bathrobe, shot her parents in cold blood, left the murder weapon at the scene, but took the robe and gloves to the outside garbage can to discard. If willing to ditch the murder weapon at the scene, I don't believe Sarah's fictitious murderer would've bothered dispose of the clothing elsewhere. Or, maybe he forgot, and once outside thought to himself, "I can't be seen like this!"

It seems other criminals often hope police won't look in the home's outside trash for evidence. Recall the case from Needle in a Haystack (s13e28), where Oliver O'Quinn left all of the damning evidence from his crime with the trash. Two vials of a prescription drug, used tubing, and a butterfly needle clearly showed how O'Quinn used an overdose of propofol to kill Michelle Herndon. The plastic grocery bag containing these items (and some of Michelle's discarded mail) was located nearby her outdoor trashcans – just 60 feet from her house.

When the rifle's scope was found in Mel Speegle's rented room, and the rifle itself was found to belong to him, he quickly became the prime suspect. But just as quickly, Speegle was cleared when his alibi of being in Boise (over two hours west) was confirmed. Unless Sarah had simply been unaware of Mel's vacation plan, she picked a poor mark to frame for her parents' murder. One should ask one's self before setting up a fall guy, "Is his possible involvement going to be easy to refute?"

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

When Mel Speegle was ruled out, police turned to a genuinely likely suspect: Bruno Santos. This was a young man with a clear motive to want Sarah's parents out of the picture. Consider this scenario: The search proceeds, and police don't find the evidence incriminating Sarah. Bruno Santos becomes the primary focus of the investigation, and formal charges of murder are filed. Was this outcome going to be okay with Sarah? Did she have an alibi in mind for Santos when he would've inevitably become the case's chief suspect? She might have been setting him up without even thinking about the all-too-real possibility.

Where is Sarah Johnson now in 2024?

On March 16, 2005, a jury found Sarah Johnson guilty of murdering her parents, Alan and Diane. She was given two concurrent life sentences without parole. Since her conviction, Sarah has petitioned for a new trial, citing ineffective counsel and new evidence. A judge denied this request. Sarah also sought to have her sentence reduced, but this too was upheld. Sarah Johnson is currently serving her sentence at the Pocatello Women's Correctional Center.