When I first read the headline of this article, my brain translated this nonsense into “did she claim the goose bit him?” So, I was compelled to do the thing that lost people hate these days.

I read the thing.

Turns out, in 1987, when authorities arrived at the Jarvis household following a domestic disturbance call, from Judith Ann Jarvis, the found Carl Jarvis, her unfortunate husband, naked on the bedroom floor.

With a gunshot wound to the back of his head.

When they questioned Judith about the obvious blood on her pajamas, she claimed it was from a goose bite. She apparently hoped they’d believe that she got bit by a goose in the middle of the night.

While his death was ruled a homicide (who tried to shoot them selves in the back of the head?) and her clothes were bagged as evidence, it somehow took them 30+ years to figure out that a goose did not bite her.

Obviously I have questions

Any normal person would.

• Why did it take so long?
  • OBVIOUSLY she did it. That alibi for the bloodstains was bonkers.
  • Apparently DNA testing was first used in a criminal case in 1986, the year before the murder occurred.
  • The next year it was used to actually convict someone of murder.
  • I’m sure it was harder to come by back in 1986, but I feel like, had they tried, they might have gotten an answer to the Whodunit a lot sooner.
  • They also didn’t send the clothes they took for evidence off for DNA testing until 2022.
    • It took 2 years to process the DNA.
    • It probably only got sent off because either some poor soul was banished to Cold Case Duty, or they volunteered.
• There was other evidence in the home. How did that not point the finger?
  • The .22 handgun, a bloody hand towel. THE DEAD NAKED MAN IN HIS BEDROOM.
  • I mean, yes, her fingerprints were likely all over the home but were there not prints on the weapon itself?
• A goose bite? Really?
  • First, they could have asked to see the actual wound, then they might have been less inclined to believe it and maybe blame her.
  • Is that really all she could come up with? Did they have geese as pets or whatever one keeps them for? Is that what made it sound plausible? Not that I’m saying geese can’t leave a mark. I don’t know from personal experience but:

In conclusion

Judith Ann Jarvis, who is currently being held without bond until her Dec. 23 heading, is now 76 years old. I think it’s safe to say she got away with it. And if the investigators hadn’t dropped the danged ball on the case it might not have gone cold for so long.

Also, perhaps if she hasn’t lied about the goose bite and not tampering with her husband’s body, maybe she would have gotten away with it for permanents.

Either way, my guess is Jarvis has been a law abiding citizen after murdering her husband, and now her she will trade her Senior discount at the local Chinese Restaurant for the wheelchair wing of a minimum security prison. Oh well, murdering your husband is bad, but she’ll get free healthcare and a guaranteed meal. Not too notch I’m sure but what can you do.

Murdering your spouse is bad, friends. But if you get away with it for 36 years, well, go with the goose bite.

---