Lori Shaver, a Florida woman accused of murdering her husband, Michael Shaver, and then assuming his online identity to deceive others, recently faced a significant setback in her defense strategy. During a pre-trial hearing, the judge presiding over the case made a crucial ruling that could significantly impact the outcome of the trial.
The Accusation and the Evidence
The charges against Lori Shaver, now known as Lori Filmer after remarrying, stem from the 2019 disappearance of her husband, Michael. Michael, a mechanic at Disney World, vanished without a trace, leaving behind his belongings and raising suspicions among his friends and family.
A probable cause affidavit filed in 2020 reveals that law enforcement officials visited the Shaver residence in February 2019 for a welfare check on Michael. Lori Shaver informed the deputies that Michael had left the family and was residing in Georgia. However, inconsistencies in her story, including Michael’s abandoned possessions and his sudden departure from his job, fueled suspicions.
Further investigation uncovered that Michael’s cell phone had been inactive for years, his driver’s license and passport had expired, and his car had been repossessed. Despite Lori’s resistance, a search warrant was obtained, leading to the grim discovery of skeletal remains beneath a concrete slab on the property.
The remains were positively identified as Michael Shaver’s through DNA analysis. A subsequent autopsy revealed that the cause of death was a gunshot wound to the back of the head, classifying the death as a homicide. A .38 caliber handgun, belonging to Lori Shaver, was recovered from her nightstand, strengthening the case against her.
The Defense’s Claim and the Witness Testimony
Lori Shaver’s defense team has maintained that she is innocent and that her then-seven-year-old daughter was responsible for Michael’s death. The daughter, whose identity remains protected, testified during a deposition that she shot her father in self-defense, alleging that he was physically abusive towards her mother.
A key element of the defense’s case rested on the testimony of Adam Narvas, a former law enforcement officer and Lori Shaver’s former employer. Narvas claimed that Shaver and her daughter were close to his family, and that the daughter confided in him about shooting her father during a gathering at his home.
The Judge’s Ruling and Its Implications
During the pre-trial hearing, the prosecution filed a motion to exclude Narvas’s testimony, arguing that it constituted hearsay and was therefore inadmissible. The prosecution contended that allowing Narvas to testify about what the daughter told him would be prejudicial to the state’s case.
Shaver’s attorney, Jeffrey Wigs, countered that Narvas’s testimony was not intended to prove the truth of the daughter’s statements but to provide context for the daughter’s decision to come forward. He argued that the testimony was essential to demonstrate that the daughter was not being coerced into taking the blame for her mother.
However, the judge ultimately sided with the prosecution, ruling that Narvas’s testimony regarding the daughter’s statements was hearsay and would be excluded from the trial. The judge deemed the testimony inadmissible, stating that it did not meet the criteria for any exceptions to the hearsay rule.
This ruling deals a significant blow to Lori Shaver’s defense, as it prevents them from presenting crucial testimony that could have supported their claim that the daughter was responsible for Michael’s death.
