Sign up for the Dr. Phil Newsletter
Twitter Facebook YouTube

2013 Shows

 
Carol and Tab’s 20-year-old son, Alex, was killed by a hit and run driver. They believe that Alex’s death was no accident and they accuse Rob, 24, of being responsible. Rob, joined by his mother, Linda, and sister, Lenora, 21, says he’s being falsely accused and placed in the middle of an “unrelenting witch hunt,” and he just wants everyone to move on. See what happens when he comes face to face with Alex’s family on Dr. Phil’s stage. Why wasn’t Rob tried on vehicular homicide charges? Hear from a crime scene reconstruction expert hired by the family. Has he uncovered new evidence? Don’t miss this riveting Dr. Phil mystery as the victim’s family confronts the young man they believe deliberately killed their son.

Find out what happened on the show.
Comments
Replied By: wordygirl212 on Apr 29, 2013, 1:28PM - In reply to donnaminyard
I suppose it's more likely you're not a friend, but your posting includes a lot of what I would expect a close friend or relative to write. 

I too believe Rob Luceman's apology sounded sincere, however it very well could be that he feels guilt for what he did and believed that apologizing might help him and the family. As for his nervousness, or lack thereof, he came across as under the influence of drugs or alcohol, so that might account for it.

What I never saw in him was the behavior of someone who was being falsely accused. Nor did I see that behavior from his family, who seemed delighted in their knowledge of legal loopholes. 

Of course I could be wrong, but so far I've seen nothing that has changed my opinion. My sincerest hope is that the Teehee's live to see the criminals who are truly responsible for the murder of their son prosecuted, no matter who it is. 



 
Replied By: wordygirl212 on Apr 29, 2013, 1:18PM - In reply to donnaminyard
They all know. And hopefully they will all answer for it one day.
 
Replied By: donnaminyard on Mar 16, 2013, 2:58PM - In reply to patsfan1280
I don't think that Rob appeared guilty at all.  I think that his mother and sister know what happened, he is stuck in the middle of their drama.
 
Replied By: donnaminyard on Mar 16, 2013, 2:56PM
I do not believe for a second that Rob had anything to do with the death of Alex.  I realize that this program aired a month ago, but I have not been able to stop thinking about it.  There is something much bigger going on in Alex's death, but Rob is not part of it.  Now, I know that many people will not like my comment, but that's okay, we are ALL entitled to an opinion, this is simply mine. My gut feeling the very first time that I watched the program I thought Rob's mother and sister were nuts, he seemed to be the sane one of the three. 

Rob is the only member of the Luceman family that actually looked Alex's family in the eyes when he spoke to them.  Body language speaks volumes if you simply pay attention to it.  He showed only mild nervousness, which can be attribuited to the fact that he was on a national television program.  Rob may know something, but the others that the police just simply don't want to question are the missing part of the puzzle.  

 I wish that Alex's family could camp out at the police station until they bring the young men who claimed to witness the hit and run in for another round of questioning.   I firmly agree that whoever killed Alex should be brought to justice, but I think many of you are judging Rob by the actions of his mother and sister.  Why would he even agree to appear on the program if he is responsible?  All he had to do is turn down the invitation.  


Alex deserves justice, but so does the innocent man that came forward willingly to prove his innocence.  It would have been better for Rob to have left his mother and sister at home.  I agreed with Dr. Phil when he told the mother and sister that their behavior made Rob appear guilty.  I think Rob did a good job of defending himself, I think that he would have been more forthcoming without his mother and sister beside him.
 
Replied By: donnaminyard on Mar 16, 2013, 2:03PM
I know this show was taped some time ago, however I have not been able to forget it.  I have watched it several times and I do NOT believe that Rob is involved in the death of Alex.  I know that many will argue this position, but knowing something and doing something are two different things.  Rob may know something, but the true killer is among the missing young men, they need to be found.  Why are the police not searching for them?  Rob went on the program and regardless of the actions of his mother and sister, I do not believe hie is capable of murder.  I think that he was nervous, who wouldn't be nervous to be on national television?  He did not show any outward signs of deceit.  I couldn't get on national television and lie without visibly shaking and sweat running down my face.  Rob did not display any of the classic signs of deceit.  He is the ONLY one of his family who could look Alex's family in the eyes for more than a second.  Didn't anyone else notice this?  His mother and sister could not maintain eye contact with them, but Rob did..  If people think it was rehearsed, so be it.  I think he was sincere, but his family has him in a bad spot. 

In my humble opinion the sister and mother know exactly what happened, but the sister is involved with one of the missing young men.  Why was she so defensive and threatened to leave the show?  She only became upset when Dr. Phil tried to find out how to contact Mike.  It stands to reason that she was protecting the guy, the mother is helping.  I think Rob is stuck in the middle of a situation and doesn't know what to do.  If he knows what happened to Alex, I think that he will come forward with the information.  The boys who disappeared are clearly responsible for the death of Alex.  The police need to do their job, and until they do this is all nothing but speculation.
 
Replied By: letsgetitright on Mar 3, 2013, 11:32AM - In reply to paulab12
A withdrawal of the original claim by way of nolle prosequi is not an adjudication on the merits of the claim and thus in a criminal case is not a guarantee that the defendant will not be later re-indicted. The entry of a nolle prosequi as a disposition is, by itself, not an adjudication on the merits of the prosecution or on the guilt or innocence of the accused, and the legal protection against double jeopardy will not automatically bar the charges from being brought again.
 
Replied By: paulab12 on Mar 3, 2013, 7:58AM
For these who are saying that he is lying at least spell it correctly!  As someone else pointed out this case was ruled Nolle prosequi for the mob who cant be  bothered to read up what that means here we go




Nolle prosequi as a declaration is most often used in criminal cases, but in jurisdictions making use of nolle prosequi in civil lawsuits, is used by a plaintiff to voluntarily drop its claims. In civil cases, a motion for voluntary dismissal may be made by a plaintiff instead of a declaration of nolle prosequi, depending upon the custom and rules of a given jurisdiction.

[edit]Decision maker Nolle prosequi as a declaration can be made by a prosecutor in a criminal case either before or during trial, resulting in the prosecutor declining to further pursue the case against the defendant. Courts seldom challenge applications for nolle prosequi, typically judges in the U.S. will sign a dismissal order prepared by the prosecution or make a docket entry indicating the disposition of the case to be "nolle prosse" after a declaration or motion by the prosecution. In criminal cases in the U.S. it has been held improper for a court to enter an order of nolle prosequi on its own without a motion by the prosecutor,[4] but as to sentencing discrepancies involved in a sentence recommendation, a trial judge is authorized to reject an underlying guilty plea based upon concerns of fairness and justice or because it is presented after the plea cutoff date.[5] The notes to Rule 48 of the US Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCRP) draw attention to the effect of the rule as contrasting with common law: Rule 48 now mandates that prosecutors seek leave of the court before dismissing a case via filing a nolle prosequi.[6]

[edit]Reason The declaration may be made because the charges cannot be proved due to evidence too weak to carry the burden of proof, because the evidence is fatally flawed in light of the claims brought,[7] or may be made if the prosecutor becomes doubtful the accused is guilty or the defendant's innocence is proved, or if the defendant has died.




Considering the mob mentality no wonder so many people have been found to be on death  row for crimes they didn't do.  Firstly phil did that racist show about a pathetic couple who tried to ignore federal law so they could buy a baby, after having a go at a surrogate for being sensible enough not to allow an extremely mentally ill woman have a baby (no one asked why she and the husband where so keen to make sure there was no genetic link to either adoptive parents so I guess there is a genetic component to her disease) then he allows Toni Ingram to come out with her attempt to blame someone else for her daughter committing suicide when it was more likely her munshausens by proxy that pushed her into it now he is allowing another family to trash someone because they can't accept he didn't do it.






 
Replied By: letsgetitright on Feb 26, 2013, 5:10PM
 If the Teehees made shirts with Rob Luceman on them I can see why they would be upset, but that wasn't the case. The Teehees had shirts with a picture of their deceased son with some sort of qoute and an offer of a reward, whats wrong with that? The signs only offerred a reward for an arrest and conviction and only mentioned Rob Luceman after an arrest warrant was issued and his face was on the local news, wanted for vehicular homicide and manslaughter. As far as the vehicle not having damage, from the sound of Alex's injury and the location on SUV that struck him, there wouldn't be the type of damage sometimes seen in pedestrian impacts. You can search auto pedestrian crash with "no visable damage" on google and find many cases where vehicles showed no damage at all. There also seems to be some concern over the witness description of the Nissan Xterra. It seems that if a witness is able to determine the exact make and model of a vehicle but be off on the color because it's 11Pm at night, and the Lucemans happen to own a dark blue Xterra, then it only stands to reason that the witness saw the Luceman Xterra that night.
 
Replied By: mafigel on Feb 26, 2013, 4:43PM
I'm so sorry for the Teehee family.  After watching the show, I truly believe that Rob is guilty.  If I were on a jury I would be voting guilty.  He looked guilty and acted guilty and his family is not helping him.  The offering of sympathy to the Teehee family was rehearsed and about as false as one could get.  There was no feelings or emotions in that little speech.  I only hope that someday the law will catch up to him and his mother as well.
 
Replied By: patsfan1280 on Feb 26, 2013, 3:55PM - In reply to upsydasy
Are you kidding...do you actually think he was trying to commiserate with the family? Those were the most insincere, coached comments of empathy that I have ever heard! The family is completly justified in seeking justice for Alex, t-shirts and posters included, if they step over the line than Rob's family is free to sue. As for letting the justice system decide guilt, obviously that is how it works but the justice system often needs help; in this case they apparently are content to drop charges because witnesses disappeared but I wonder if they are even looking for those witnesses. Obviously Alex's family is having success in their quest because they ended up on this show with all this publicity didn't they. Perhaps their work will end up with another indictement because this young man appeared guilty as hell to me!
 
Showing 1-10 of total 248 Comments