Megyn Kelly's Fatal Attraction: "It’s Been a Million Years Ago" — Ep. 3 | MK Confidential: skim's analysis identifies 8 key moments, with 4 potential conflicts of interest flagged. This video details the 2009 investigation into the 1986 murder of Sherri Rasmussen, focusing on LAPD detective Stephanie Lazarus. Watch the parts that matter on YouTube — creator gets full credit, ads play, time saved. Available in three skim slices — Short for the highest-impact moments, Medium for gist plus context, Relaxed for the comprehensive breakdown. Patent-pending depth control, the only AI summary tool that lets you choose how deep to go.
Category: Current Events. Format: Commentary. YouTube video analyzed by skim.
skim AI Analysis
Credibility assessment: Investigative Journalism. The video presents a detailed, evidence-based narrative of a complex murder investigation, relying on police interviews, case files, and timelines. It meticulously reconstructs the investigative process, highlighting key breakthroughs like DNA evidence and strategic surveillance. The presentation is factual and aims to inform the audience about the case's progression.
Bias assessment: Slightly Pro-Prosecution. While striving for objectivity, the narrative naturally leans towards the investigative team's perspective, framing Stephanie Lazarus as the clear perpetrator. The focus on her actions and the eventual conviction, without extensive exploration of alternative theories or defense arguments, creates a subtle inclination towards the prosecution's viewpoint.
Originality: 65% — Standard True Crime. The video follows a common true crime documentary structure, detailing a murder, the investigation, and the eventual arrest. It uses standard investigative techniques and narrative devices. However, the depth of detail in reconstructing the surveillance and DNA collection adds a layer of originality to the procedural aspects.
Depth: 70% — Detailed Procedural Analysis. The video excels at breaking down the intricate steps of the investigation, from initial DNA collection to surveillance tactics and the eventual arrest. It provides a thorough look at the procedural challenges and breakthroughs, offering a deep dive into how the case was solved. The analysis of Stephanie Lazarus's actions and the timeline of events is particularly detailed.
Key Points (8)
1. The Cold Case Reopened
Timestamp: 00:03:02 to 00:08:40 - watch this moment on skim
In February 2009, Detective Jim Nuttle of the Van Nuys Homicide unit decided to reopen the 23-year-old murder case of Sherri Rasmussen, driven by new DNA evidence from a bite mark on the victim's arm, which indicated the perpetrator was a woman. This led to the identification of Stephanie Lazarus, an LAPD detective and acquaintance of Sherri's husband, John Rutton, as a person of interest. The investigative team took extreme measures to maintain secrecy, using a generic case number and avoiding Lazarus's name to prevent her from discovering the renewed investigation. The investigation's success hinged on obtaining Lazarus's DNA discreetly.
Significance (High): This marked a critical turning point, shifting a decades-old cold case into an active investigation with a prime suspect who was also a fellow officer.
Sources in support: Jim Nuttle (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Mark Martinez (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Rob Bub (Supervisor, Van Nuys Homicide)
Neutral sources: Megyn Kelly (Host), Nells Rasmuson (Father of Sherri Rasmussen)
2. The Stolen Handgun and Database Oversight
Timestamp: 00:09:00 to 00:10:05 - watch this moment on skim
In March 1986, just 13 days after Sherri Rasmussen's murder, Stephanie Lazarus reported a .38 caliber Smith & Wesson revolver stolen. This firearm was purchased by Lazarus in February 1984. The fact that this gun, a caliber consistent with the murder weapon, was reported stolen so soon after the murder, and that this information sat in a state database for 23 years without being accessed by investigators working Rasmussen's case, represents a significant oversight.
Significance (Medium): The timing of the stolen handgun report, coupled with the lack of investigation into this detail for over two decades, highlights a critical missed opportunity and a potential blind spot in the original investigation.
Sources in support: Mark Martinez (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Jim Nuttle (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide)
Neutral sources: Megyn Kelly (Host), Rob Bub (Supervisor, Van Nuys Homicide)
3. The DNA Trail: From Costco to Justice
Timestamp: 00:13:03 to 00:17:25 - watch this moment on skim
After weeks of covert surveillance, detectives obtained a crucial DNA sample from a discarded Pepsi cup and straw used by Stephanie Lazarus at a Costco. This sample was sent to the lab, and on May 29th, 2009, criminalist Jennifer Francis confirmed it matched the DNA from the bite mark on Sherri Rasmussen's arm. This definitive match provided the breakthrough needed to move forward with the arrest, closing a 23-year-old case.
Significance (High): The DNA match was the linchpin that transformed suspicion into concrete evidence, directly linking Lazarus to the crime scene and enabling the arrest.
Sources in support: Jennifer Francis (Criminalist), Jim Nuttle (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Mark Martinez (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Rob Bub (Supervisor, Van Nuys Homicide)
Neutral sources: Megyn Kelly (Host)
4. Lazarus's Interrogation and Evasiveness
Timestamp: 00:16:42 to 00:20:45 - watch this moment on skim
On June 5th, 2009, detectives Greg Sterns and Dan Harmo brought Stephanie Lazarus to the jail division under the pretense of assisting with an extortion suspect. During a lengthy interrogation, they questioned her about her past relationship with John Rutton. Lazarus repeatedly described her connection to Rutton as being from 'a million years ago' and struggled to recall specific details, often referring to her extensive photo collection. Her evasiveness and inconsistent memory contrasted sharply with the concrete evidence gathered against her.
Significance (Medium): Lazarus's behavior during the interrogation, characterized by vagueness and attempts to distance herself from Rutton, further fueled the detectives' suspicions and contrasted with her documented past actions.
Sources in support: Greg Sterns (Detective, Robbery Homicide), Dan Harmo (Detective, Robbery Homicide)
Neutral sources: Megyn Kelly (Host), Stephanie Lazarus (LAPD Detective)
5. The Unsettling Lead: Stephanie Lazarus Emerges
Timestamp: 00:27:50 to 00:30:48 - watch this moment on skim
In the aftermath of Sherri Rasmussen's 1986 murder, her husband John Ruetten and father Nells repeatedly pointed investigators towards John's ex-girlfriend, LAPD detective Stephanie Lazarus, citing a prior confrontation. However, initial detectives, particularly Lyall Mayor, claim this lead was never emphasized or even mentioned, leading to a significant divergence in accounts about the early investigation's focus.
Significance (High): This divergence immediately casts a shadow over the initial investigation, suggesting either a failure to follow up on critical information or a deliberate omission. The conflicting narratives between the victim's family, the husband, and the lead detective create a compelling mystery about why Stephanie Lazarus was not a primary focus from the outset.
Sources in support: Jim Nuttle (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide), Greg Sterns (Detective, Robbery Homicide)
Sources against: Mark Martinez (Detective, Van Nuys Homicide)
6. The Cold Case Rekindled: DNA and a Stolen Gun
Timestamp: 00:30:52 to 00:33:53 - watch this moment on skim
Decades after the murder, the case was re-examined. A crucial DNA match from a bite mark on Sherri Rasmussen's arm finally linked her to Stephanie Lazarus. Simultaneously, it was revealed that Lazarus had reported a .38 revolver stolen shortly after the murder, the same caliber used in the crime, and this weapon was never recovered. These developments provided the critical evidence needed to move forward.
Significance (High): The DNA match provided the irrefutable scientific link, transforming a cold case into an active investigation with a clear suspect. The stolen gun adds a layer of circumstantial evidence, suggesting a potential disposal of the murder weapon and further implicating Lazarus.
Sources in support: Rob Bub (Supervisor, Van Nuys Homicide), Jennifer Francis (Criminalist), Nells Rasmuson (Father of Sherri Rasmussen)
7. The Interrogation: Denial and Arrest
Timestamp: 00:33:56 to 00:35:54 - watch this moment on skim
During a 2009 interview, detectives presented Stephanie Lazarus with the evidence, including the DNA match and her name appearing in the murder book. Lazarus initially denied speaking to detectives and expressed shock, but eventually requested a lawyer. Despite her claims of innocence and surprise, the mounting evidence led to her arrest 23 years after Sherri Rasmussen's murder.
Significance (High): The interrogation captures the critical moment of confrontation, where Lazarus's reactions and statements are scrutinized. Her request for a lawyer and subsequent shock, juxtaposed with the DNA evidence, form the crux of the prosecution's case, leading directly to her apprehension.
Sources in support: Nells Rasmuson (Father of Sherri Rasmussen)
Neutral sources: Megyn Kelly (Host)
8. The 23-Year Question: Why the Delay?
Timestamp: 00:36:14 to 00:37:14 - watch this moment on skim
The video concludes by posing the central question: why did it take the LAPD 23 years to arrest Stephanie Lazarus, especially given that her name and potential involvement were reportedly mentioned early in the investigation? This highlights potential systemic failures, investigative oversights, or even internal resistance within the department.
Significance (High): This lingering question underscores the investigative shortcomings and raises serious concerns about justice delayed. It prompts viewers to consider the broader implications for cold case investigations and police accountability, leaving a lasting impression of frustration and unresolved issues.
Sources in support: Megyn Kelly (Host)
Potential Conflicts of Interest (4)
Internal LAPD Investigation (High severity)
Type: Professional
The investigation into Sherri Rasmussen's murder directly involved an active LAPD detective, Stephanie Lazarus. This created a significant internal conflict, requiring careful handling by her colleagues to avoid bias or obstruction.
Significance: The fact that the prime suspect was an LAPD detective presented a monumental challenge. It raised questions about departmental integrity and the potential for internal cover-ups, necessitating extraordinary measures like covert surveillance and discreet evidence collection to ensure a fair investigation.
Lazarus's Relationship with John Rutton (High severity)
Type: Personal
Stephanie Lazarus had a complex, on-again-off-again romantic and sexual relationship with John Rutton, who was engaged to and later married the victim, Sherri Rasmussen.
Significance: This personal entanglement provides a powerful motive for the murder. Lazarus's apparent obsession and inability to accept Rutton's marriage to Rasmussen suggest a deep-seated jealousy that could have driven her to extreme actions, casting a shadow over her professional conduct.
LAPD Internal Investigation (High severity)
Type: Professional
The investigation into Sherri Rasmussen's murder involved an LAPD detective, Stephanie Lazarus, as the prime suspect. This created a significant professional conflict for the LAPD, as they were investigating one of their own, potentially leading to internal pressures or reluctance to pursue leads aggressively.
Significance: This internal conflict raises profound questions about accountability within law enforcement. Did the LAPD's desire to protect its reputation or avoid internal strife contribute to the 23-year delay in solving the murder? The audience is left to wonder if the investigation was compromised by the suspect's affiliation.
John Ruetten's Initial Statements (Medium severity)
Type: Personal
John Ruetten, the victim's husband, initially identified his ex-girlfriend, Stephanie Lazarus, as a person of interest. However, detectives like Lyall Mayor claim he did not emphasize this lead, while Ruetten and Sherri's father insist they did. This discrepancy creates a conflict regarding the thoroughness of the initial investigation and the reliability of Ruetten's statements.
Significance: The conflicting accounts of John Ruetten's initial statements to police cast doubt on the early investigative process. Was Ruetten not forthcoming, or were the detectives dismissive? This ambiguity fuels suspicion about whether crucial early leads were deliberately ignored or simply mishandled, potentially allowing the killer to evade immediate capture.
This analysis was generated by skim (skim.plus), an AI-powered content analysis platform by Credible AI. Scores and classifications represent the platform's AI-generated assessment and should be considered alongside other sources.
