The prosecution says she hired an ex-boyfriend to kill her husband.The problem is, they only have a possible motive. No evidence. Just the fact that she had a $2 million insurance policy on him.
They had been married for a while and made a nice living selling Indian bingo halls and slot machines and various and sundry other gambling mechanisms before Congress legally allowed them to open casinos. The real estate market took a downturn and their finances began to dwindle.
Gary Triano, Pamela's husband, was a man on the edge. Hemorrhaging money from every orifice he turned to gambling. He associated and did business with known mafia men. He borrowed money from people you never want to borrow money from. He was abusive and violent and mean.
Once all the shit hit the fan, Pamela did what most women in her shoes would do and shot the gap. She left and made a new life for herself. She moved and began selling real estate and continued to pay the premiums on his insurance policy because she knew he was spiralling out of control and would not do it. He left her as the beneficiary of his policies because they had two children together.
Her trial just started this week and her attorneys say the prosecution is weak and flimsy. She was wealthy of her accord and there is no evidence linking her to the crime. All the evidence shows her relationship with the man who killed her husband but nothing concrete against her.
The police dropped the ball and lost evidence from the crime scene that may have pointed to another killer. The police say they have testimony from friends that say Pamela masterminded the murder and spoke of him dieing before it happened. Triano's daughter also says she did it.
These black widow/gold digger cases scare me. People get so wound up in what they feel is the moral issue they forget to look at the evidence.