Ken Tranchida murder of Tina Biggar

I noted a few curious items in this episode. Ken Tranchita seems to have been a heck of a salesman to get Tina to give him the time of day outside of their "professional" relationship. At 20 years her senior, I'm guessing he was able to convince her that he had enough money to help make her life more comfortable. But the episode suggested that he'd only intended to loan Tina the money for the new car, not to buy it outright. The home where investigators located Tina's "art" on his refrigerator didn't suggest financial success. Nor did the Blue Bird motel where Ken and Tina had their first encounter. Given Tina's "dozens of clients" across three different agencies, charging well in excess of $100 - $300 per rendezvous, I wouldn't have thought she'd need money for a car. It was indicated that her credit cards were maxed out, and she was paying for her schooling. But was Tina also squirreling away some of this cash? Was she possibly spending it on another addiction? Or was she attempting to use Ken's generosity to her gain? Ken had apparently earned a high degree of trust very rapidly, as her murder took place a mere 12 days after they'd met.

Image credit: Episode screen capture from Forensic Files

As for Tina Biggar's cause of death, the pathologist indicated he found nothing to suggest a head injury, though both of Ken's stories included Tina striking her head during a scuffle. In Ken's second tale, he did indicate strangling Tina with the offensive suggestion that "she was miserable" and he was "doing her a favor" by ending her life. With the amount of blood found below the liner in the trunk of Tina's car, I wouldn't think even a severe blunt trauma head wound would be the cause. I agree with multiple YouTube commenters that Ken may have cut Tina's throat.

Speaking of the blood in Tina's trunk, how embarrassing was it that such seemingly obvious evidence was initially overlooked by investigators? In the photo, looking from a distance, the blood on the coffee mug (or some sort of dark staining) was apparent. It's obvious the police didn't remove and examine items in Tina's trunk before releasing Ken Tranchita for a lack of evidence. One YouTube commenter jokingly suggested the investigators were intimidated with the utter mess in that trunk. This time the perpetrator committed one of the classic blunders (keeping property of the victim that contains significant forensic evidence linking him to the crime), but police failed to initially seize that convenient opportunity.