he couldn t see what he was shooting at. he thought their lives were in danger. i had seen the movement in front of me and i had pulled the trigger at that time. he said he was a good man who made a horrible mistake. did you at any time? no, she was the love of my life. a mistake he said he would regret forever. she was hurt pretty bad. she would have on cross-examination prosecutor carl alexander challenged lars key claim, that in the kadark he simply couldn distinguish debbie from an intruder. you know debbie s shape? i know her shape. the love of your life. yes, sir. you know better than anybody else? yes, sir. and you can t tell it is her
story. i seen people right here so i told her to wait here. i seen people running. i heard the dog growling. reporter: in his interview down at the statement, lars revised his story again. that s when he said he woke to the front door squeaking, and offered, for the first time, this description of how he realized he d shot debbie. i heard this groaning and i knew it was my wife. reporter: during those interviews, lars appeared heartbroken, at times falling apart. he was described as pacing in the blanket. he was mumbling, he was moaning. at various times, yes. is that not what a husband should do after something like that? it sounds normal. well, that s the thing, it sounds normal, right? but when the detective looks at him and he doesn t see any
it soon became clear they wanted to hold lars accountable. for a term of 15 years. 15 years, just a few years shy of the maximum sentence. i spoke with lars at the state penitentiary in beeville, texas, where he said he carries a photo of debbie in the pocket of his prison uniform. i kiss her picture every morning, every night. i asked him to skdescribe on again what happened the morning he shot debbie. i woke in the middle of the night. the story sounded familiar, but then and i seen the door closing very, very, very slowly. he had seen the door closing? as he had before, he added a detail to his story. moments later he added another. there were people in my house reaching for me. reaching for you? well, i just seen movement. so i asked lars about his
depression. he just kept sayin he wanted debbie back, if he could get her back. it was an accident. he was sorry. reporter: investigators, as they worked through the case, looked into the couple s finances. debbie s assets totaled more than a million dollars when she died. her dad was named as the beneficiary on most of her investment accounts. so lars, it seemed, had little to gain by killing her. still, the whispers continued among debbie s friends. who told investigators there was another side to the marriage. i know that she was frustrated. reporter: even simple things
when you pulled that trigger? no, sir. lars testified for two-and-a-half hours, but would it be enough to convince the jury he was innocent? they now faced a decision between murder, manslaughter or not guilty. after more than six hours, a verdict. on count i, the murder charge we the jury find the defendant lars itzo not guilty. but before anyone in the courtroom had time to react, another verdict. guilty of manslaughter as charged in count two of the indictment. the verdict pleased almost no one. no, this can t be. for so many on debbie s side, it was as if the jury left lars off. disbelief, anger beyond words. but lars family believed prosecutors had it all wrong. it was about them winning. it had nothing to do with justice or the truth. then came sentencing. in texas the jury decides.