Civil Court Orders Widow to Pay $200 Million in Wrongful Death Suit Over Doctor’s Murder
More than a decade after the shocking death of Dr. Steven Schwartz, a prominent kidney specialist in Florida, a civil court has ruled his wife, Rebecca Schwartz, responsible for his death, ordering her to pay his three children a staggering $200 million. The case, which has captivated the attention of the Tarpon Springs community and beyond, reached a significant, albeit potentially symbolic, juncture with the civil court’s judgment. While the likelihood of the children receiving the full amount is slim, the ruling serves as a powerful statement about accountability and the pursuit of justice in the face of a heinous crime.
Dr. Steven Schwartz, 74, was found dead in May 2014, the victim of two gunshot wounds inflicted in the garage of his opulent Tarpon Springs mansion. His wife, Rebecca Schwartz, now 64, was the one who reportedly alerted the authorities, claiming a burglary had occurred at their residence. However, inconsistencies in her narrative and mounting evidence soon cast suspicion upon her, leading to a protracted legal battle that culminated in the recent civil court decision.
Despite the absence of criminal charges against Rebecca Schwartz in connection with her husband’s murder, the civil court proceedings painted a damning picture of her involvement. The court, presiding over a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Dr. Schwartz’s children, determined that Rebecca Schwartz "unlawfully and intentionally killed, or participated in procuring the death" of her husband. This ruling, while not carrying the same legal weight as a criminal conviction, underscores the court’s belief in her culpability based on the evidence presented.
The substantial $200 million award is intended to compensate Dr. Schwartz’s children for the loss of their father and the emotional distress caused by his untimely death. However, legal experts suggest that the actual amount they will receive is likely to be significantly lower, estimated to be in the range of $10 to $20 million. This discrepancy arises from the challenges of collecting such a large sum from Rebecca Schwartz, whose assets may not be sufficient to cover the full judgment.
Wil Florin, the attorney representing Dr. Schwartz’s children, has asserted that the motive behind the murder was purely financial. According to Florin, Rebecca Schwartz had been systematically embezzling money from her husband for years, diverting funds to her children from a previous marriage and even investing in a marijuana grow house with her handyman.
The situation reached a critical point when Dr. Schwartz reportedly discovered his wife’s embezzlement activities and threatened to file for divorce, potentially leaving her with nothing. The final straw, according to Florin, was Rebecca Schwartz’s purchase of a Verizon Wireless store in Wisconsin for one of her sons, using embezzled funds.
The circumstances surrounding Dr. Schwartz’s death are particularly chilling. As he prepared to leave for work at the hospital, he was shot twice in the head while descending the stairs of his home. The forensic evidence presented at trial painted a grim picture of a premeditated act of violence.
While Rebecca Schwartz has managed to evade criminal prosecution thus far, her handyman, whose identity has not been released, was implicated in the crime. He was eventually deported to Albania after pleading guilty to one count of being an accessory to the murder. The handyman’s DNA was found on Dr. Schwartz’s shirt, and his cellphone records contradicted his alibi, further solidifying his involvement in the events leading up to the doctor’s death.
According to Florin, the handyman was dispatched to the scene after the murder to cover up the crime. His tasks included cleaning up the scene, removing the hard drive from the surveillance system, and attempting to retrieve the bullets with a butcher knife.
The absence of a criminal conviction for Rebecca Schwartz raises questions about the burden of proof in criminal cases versus civil cases. In criminal proceedings, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a higher standard than the preponderance of the evidence required in civil cases. This difference in standards can sometimes lead to different outcomes in related criminal and civil cases.
The case of Dr. Steven Schwartz’s murder highlights the complexities of the legal system and the challenges of achieving justice in cases where direct evidence is lacking. While Rebecca Schwartz has not been held criminally liable for her husband’s death, the civil court’s ruling represents a significant victory for his children and a measure of closure in a long and arduous legal battle. The public exposure of her actions and the financial penalty imposed upon her serve as a form of public accountability, even in the absence of a criminal conviction. The fact that the handyman was convicted as an accessory after the fact shows that the legal system did find someone guilty even though the wife was not charged with the crime. The handyman, according to the attorney, was sent to "clean up the mess, take the hard drive of the surveillance system, take a butcher knife and try to retrieve the bullets".
The aftermath of this case is likely to involve continued legal maneuvering as Dr. Schwartz’s children seek to collect the awarded damages. The process of identifying and seizing Rebecca Schwartz’s assets may be protracted and challenging, but the determination of Dr. Schwartz’s children to seek justice for their father’s death remains unwavering.
Rebecca Schwartz’s attorney has not yet commented on the verdict.
