A Twisted Nightmare - Part 4 - The Trial

Episode # 34 - The Black Widower - Part 4 - The Trial

In January 2009, it seemed like the murder case against Thomas Randolph would be moving forward to bring him to justice for the murders of Mike Miller and his wife Sharon Randolph. Finally, he would face some accountability for the decades of pain he had caused.

Throughout his life, Thomas Randolph always seemed to be able to escape serious consequences for his actions, even being acquitted of the murder of his second wife, and serving a light sentence for conspiracy to commit murder for hiring a hitman to murder the prosecution’s star witness in that case.

In part 4 we’ll talk about his trial, and explain why it took over 15 years for justice to be served.

[Shaun] 

Hi and welcome to Sins and Survivors, a Las Vegas true crime podcast, where we focus on domestic violence, missing persons, and unsolved cases. I’m your host, Shaun, and with me as always, is the one and only John.

[John] 

I am the only John in the room.

[Shaun] 

This week we are bringing you Part 4 of our 4-part series on the Black Widower, Thomas Randolph. If you haven’t listened to the previous parts, you need to. Go back and listen to those and we’ll be waiting right here.

Just a quick recap of last week – Thomas Randolph was charged with the murder of his second wife, Becky Gault after Becky was found dead from a gunshot wound to the head. Her death was originally ruled a suicide, but additional evidence came to light. A friend of Tom’s, Eric Tarantino, told police that Tom had tried to coerce him into murdering Becky. In his many conversations with Eric about how he would kill Becky, staging a suicide was one of the plans Tom came up with.

During the trial, Tom tried to hire a hitman to kill Eric, but the hitman he attempted to hire was actually an undercover cop. Despite all of this, Tom was ultimately acquitted of Becky’s murder. And received a minimal penalty for felony witness tampering for trying to find a hitman to kill Eric Tarantino. 

[John] 

As we mentioned, Tom was finally arrested for the murders of Sharon and Mike Miller, after an exhaustive nationwide investigation into his relationships and background and the discovery that of the 6 wives he’d had, 4 of them were dead.

The case was presided over by Judge Stefany Miley and on January 21st, 2009, Randolph pleaded not guilty to charges of first degree murder with a deadly weapon of both Sharon and Mike Miller, and conspiracy to commit murder. 

This has seemed to be a common thread in stories we’ve covered recently, but Tom Randolph did everything he could to prevent the trial from starting. In the court records, we can see there are hundreds of motions filed, and Tom fired 10 lawyers in a never-ending delay campaign that often coincided with the days the trial was scheduled to begin. When that happened, the trial was just delayed, again. The lawyers clearly understood this was part of his strategy.

At one point, he even tried to apply to represent himself, which any lawyer or judge will tell you, is a very bad idea.

Tom was an impossible client. He was constantly second-guessing the defense team of the moment, seeming to think that he knew better than they did how to mount his defense. He had previously worked with Lawyers in his work (it's unclear when), and one of his lawyers often said he was intelligent but extremely hard to represent.

On February 9th, 2009 the prosecutors filed their intention to seek the death penalty for Randolph. 

[Shaun] 

One of the main sticking points between the prosecution and the defense was whether the prosecution would be allowed to talk about the case of Randolph’s second wife Becky Gault (which was the first time he was tried for murder with a prosecutor seeking the death penalty)

There are obvious similarities between the 1986 case in Utah and the 2009 death of Sharon Randolph which made it seem relevant to the Sharon Randolph case

• Both cases involve Randolph locating, befriending, and grooming a hitman to kill his wife.
• In both cases, Randolph took out large life insurance policies with himself as the beneficiary.  

With the death penalty on the table for the second time in his life, you’d think that Randolph might be concerned.. but not Tom. In various interviews, he never seemed concerned. In an interview with NBC News, he couldn't control his unbelievable smugness, and he said things like “It's not a big deal”, “I'm glad they made this a death penalty case” and “I’d have felt cheated if it wasn't a death penalty case” and “this seems like a death penalty kind of case!”

It's almost as if he didn't understand the gravity of the situation, and that he was actually at risk of being sentenced to death.. Like he was watching someone else's life. 

[John] 

One of Randolph’s lawyers was Brent Bryson, a former OJ Simpson Defense team member with an interesting history. Bryson was involved in an altercation in a bar when he was much younger which resulted in the death of a bar patron. 

He was charged with manslaughter but ultimately acquitted. According to Bryson, his acquittal fuelled his passion for his work as a defense attorney.

It was Bryson who argued in front of Judge Miley that the Utah murder of Beckie Gault should not be allowed to be introduced into Sharon’s murder case. He argued that Randolph was acquitted in that case, and he had exercised his option available under Utah law to have the case sealed, therefore the prosecution should not be allowed to discuss it. 

Bryson went on to claim that Tom had “no significant criminal history” which is patently false, even if you ignore the murder trial. He did, remember, spend time in jail after the conspiracy to commit murder charge (which was pleaded down to felony witness tampering), not to mention the drug charges through the years.

The prosecution argued that Becky’s death was relevant and showed a pattern of behavior and brought in the original prosecutor from Becky’s murder trial to describe the facts of what happened in that case instead of bringing in anyone offering direct evidence (like Eric Tarantino for example). 

It was clear that the defense realized that the prosecution discussing the Utah case would be incredibly damaging to the current case.

Ultimately, Judge Miley ruled that the Utah case could be brought in, making the defense’s job much harder. Just after that ruling, Tom fired Bryson, delaying the trial again. This occurred a year and a half after his original arrest in 2009. 

Because of all the delays, the trial didn't proceed until 2017.

[Shaun] 

We’ve talked before about the difference between circumstantial and direct evidence, and this is one of those cases where there was very little direct evidence just because the people who could have given direct evidence of the night of the murders were gone. Essentially most of the case was built on strong circumstantial evidence.

That’s not necessarily a problem if the evidence is compelling and the prosecution could convince the jury of Tom’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence just has to be cohesive and involve facts that when considered together lead to a conclusion of guilt.

The prosecution brought in a parade of witnesses who lived in Las Vegas as well as flying them in from all over the country. As you'd expect they called Sharon’s daughter Colleen, along with her co-workers from the salon,  Alice Wolfe and Deidra Marley-Johnson, all of whom gave testimony about how Sharon grew unhappy during the marriage and about all the red flags they saw in the relationship.

There was also Mark, the neighbor who heard the gunshots the night of the murder who provided compelling direct testimony on the timing of the gunshots compared with the time Tom called 911, showing that despite what Tom claimed, he didn't call 911 right away, he waited nearly 15 minutes… 15 minutes which might have made the difference in saving Sharon’s life.

The prosecution also brought in Kathryn Thomas, Tom’s first wife. to testify that Tom was controlling, manipulative, and psychologically abusive. She even cited the example of Tom throwing the oatmeal against the wall in a rage because it didn't have sugar on it.

Gayna Allmon (Wife #3) was bought in too, of course, and told the story of how Tom was cleaning his gun at the dining room table and it just “went off” coming within a foot of hitting her, then describing how she decided there and then to get out as soon as she could, fearing for her life.

[John]

Since they were allowed to talk about Becky’s murder, the prosecution brought in Eric Tarantino, who you’ll remember was Randolph’s planned accomplice/hitman. Tom attempted to coerce Eric into killing Beckie, just as he would years later with Mike Miller in the murder of his wife Sharon. The difference was that instead of participating in the plan, Tarantino warned Beckie and fled to New Hampshire. 

The prosecution said at one point that the only reason Mike Miller was dead is that Eric Tarantino refused to kill Beckie and fled the state, and Tom wasn't going to make that mistake again.

Eric testified that he was still terrified Tom Randolph would come after him, and he said that until Tom was dead, he’d be sleeping with a gun next to his bed.

The detective from the Utah case, Scott Connelly testified as well, and from his reaction before the trial in interviews, he was happy to be there and hoping that Tom Randolph would be put away for a very long time.

Wendy, the woman Tom was dating after Becky’s death, testified that Tom convinced her to take his car title to a man that Wendy believed would help in Tom’s defense. She brought her 8 year old son with her, thinking she was running a simple errand. She was unaware that the car title was being offered as payment for a hitman to kill Eric Tarantino, and she was offering that payment to an undercover cop. The police officer pointed a gun at her head when they placed her under arrest. 

The prosecution finished by calling Dean O’Kelley, who probably knew the most about Tom Randolph, his history, his wives, his crimes, and the current case. O’Kelley testified about everything from his initial involvement with the case, through the re-enactment, through their search into Tom’s past, all the way up to Tom’s arrest in 2009.

The defense called only one witness, Tom's older brother, and the only part of his testimony that could have had any impact on the case was when he explained that it was he who had driven Tom to the “re-enactment” that he did with the detectives 7 days after Sharon’s murder. 

He testified that Tom couldn't drive because he was under the influence of unknown prescription drugs, and probably shouldn't have even participated in the re-enactment then

After that, they chose not to have Tom testify in his own defense, even though it was Tom’s right to face his accusers and answer questions. It would have been risky to put Tom on the stand though, because he would have been subject to cross-examination by the prosecution.

The jury deliberated for 4 hours on the first day, and then returned with a verdict on the second day.

They found him guilty of all charges including conspiracy to commit murder, Murder with the use of a deadly weapon, and First-degree murder

[Shaun]

Next up was the sentencing or penalty phase, and remember that the state was seeking the death penalty for Randolph. In this phase, the prosecution brought in witnesses who could attest to the immeasurable harm Tom had done to their lives.

Rachel Gaskin is the daughter of Francis Randolph, Tom’s 5th wife (the one right before Sharon), and her testimony was an emotional bombshell. She told a story about a day that her mom Francis went out and got Burger King for them, and because Burger King had put mayonnaise on Tom’s burger he flew into a rage and slammed the burger into her face.

She also told the story of the night her mom died and how she had to live with the fact that there would never be proof of anything because he had her cremated right away.

On day two of sentencing, unbelievably, Tom insisted on wearing a Dallas Cowboys Tony Romo jersey which is highly irregular and indicates a level of contempt for the court and everyone involved. The defense brought in his children Krista and Justice who told the court what a great dad he was, which according to the jurors later had absolutely no impact. They also brought in his mother, but again the jurors weren't moved by her statements.

Once the witnesses were done, Tom was allowed to give an allocution statement, meant to impact the sentence he’s given by demonstrating that he understands the harm he’s caused and to express remorse.

Tom decided not to go that route. He expressed that he felt like he was the victim and asked for life in prison instead of the death penalty.

The jury decided to impose the death penalty on Tom. In an interview right after the sentencing, he said “Now it's just 3 more years.. And we’ll get a fair trial”. He said that his lawyer told him that if the prosecution were allowed to bring in the Utah case, the Supreme Court would overturn any guilty verdict.

[John] 

With the guilty verdict, and the death sentence news outlets moved on from the story and most people thought that was the end of the Black Widower.

Tom and his new lawyers filed an appeal right away based on the 1986 murder of Becky being brought into Sharon’s murder trial, and the appeal was heard by the Nevada Supreme court

The Court ruled that some of the information about Tom’s prior bad acts could have been admissible to show proof of Tom’s motive or intent, as long as the evidence being brought would not unfairly prejudice the jury, which is something we’ve talked about before on Sins & Survivors.

The Nevada Supreme Court did find that parts of the evidence offered about Becky’s death would be relevant, such as the evidence that he solicited Eric to murder Becky for insurance money and then tried to hire someone to kill Eric as well. There were too many similarities to overlook – in both instances, Tom groomed a friend/handyman to murder his wife for insurance money, and then he looked for a way to eliminate the men he conspired with. 

However, another key part of allowing bad acts into a trial is that the bad acts must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. When Judge Miley ruled on allowing the evidence of Becky’s murder trial, the only witness was the prosecutor from that trial. The court didn’t hear directly from Eric or anyone with direct knowledge of Tom’s schemes, so the court was only relying on hearsay. 

Also, the Nevada Supreme Court emphasized that Tom had been acquitted of Becky’s murder, which weakened the trial court’s ability to rely on the prosecutor’s statements as clear and convincing evidence that Tom was guilty of all that was alleged in that case. 

[Shaun] 

The second issue was that when Eric Tarantino and Tom’s ex-mistress, Wendy Moore testified, they talked about things that included a lot of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence against Tom. 

For example, the fact that Tom had beaten Eric and stolen his medication was seen as a prejudicial fact that was not related at all to Sharon’s murder. Also, Wendy’s testimony of how she was duped by Tom into delivering the payment to the undercover cop posing as a hitman, showed that Tom didn’t care about her safety or the safety of a child – which the court also found to be prejudicial and not relevant to Sharon’s murder trial. 

As a result, the Nevada Supreme Court overturned his conviction and remanded the case back to the 8th judicial district for an immediate new trial. Thankfully, he was not released from jail, they just ordered a new trial

Once again, Colleen and Sharon’s loved ones had to deal with the torture of additional delays in getting justice for Sharon. The new trial did not begin until August 2023, more than 15 years after Sharon’s murder

This time, all the evidence about Becky’s death, Tom’s likely involvement, Eric Tarantino, etc. was not included. 

The prosecution also decided not to seek the death penalty this time, as Tom was nearly 69 years old. 

 [John] 

In their opening statements to the jury, Chief Deputy District Attorney Chris Hammer told the jury that they were about to hear about 35 years of pain and anguish that Thomas Randolph had caused. 

Hammer went into detail about all the inconsistencies in Tom’s story, such as the fact that Mike’s ski mask had no bullet holes in it, and had no blood on it, proving that Tom didn’t shoot him while Mike was wearing the mask, and certainly not in the head. 

He also explained that all of the bullet casings from Tom’s gun were found in the garage – not the hallway where Tom had clearly told investigators that he had shot Mike.  

Tom also claimed that he called 911 immediately, but his neighbor testified that he heard the shots 20 minutes before the police arrived. 

Hammer told the jury: “When the defendant recounts what happened, he is the hero of his own story …However, the evidence in this case will show that the defendant’s story does not add up.”

One of the witnesses in the 2020 trial was Elizabeth, or “Lizzie”, a woman that Tom was having an affair with during his marriage to Sharon. We pointed out in Part 2 how Tom was known for having multiple relationships at once, and no surprise, he was dating someone else during his marriage to Sharon. 

Lizzie testified that Tom also had taken out a large insurance policy on her with Tom and Lizzie’s daughter as the beneficiaries. Lizzie said that she knew Tom was married to Sharon, and she was well aware that he was stringing them both along. 

Eventually, Lizzie got sick and tired of this arrangement. She told Tom she was done with this back and forth, and she gave Tom an ultimatum – he’d have to break up with Sharon, or she was through with him. Tom had told her he would “deal with” Sharon.

Just a few months later, Sharon was murdered.

[Shaun] 

Tom’s defense attorney countered back on this. He asked Lizzie if Tom ever came running back to her after Sharon was dead to be like, “She’s gone! Now we can be together!” and Lizzie said no, that didn’t happen. 

Presumably, the defense asked this question to show that Tom obviously didn’t kill Sharon so he could be with Lizzie, and to refute what was implied by him saying he would “deal with” Sharon. 

In this trial, Colleen had to testify again about her mom’s relationship with Tom. The Prosecution also played the disturbing voicemails Tom left for Colleen following her mom’s murder. 

The jurors also heard the call Thomas made to 911 the night Sharon was killed, and the various statements he made to detectives during the investigation.

They also heard the evidence that Tom had called Mike Miller at least 3 times a day, as well as testimony from Mike’s family about their relationship.

The trial lasted 9 days, and during the second day of deliberations, August 24, 2023, the jury found Thomas Randolph guilty of 2 counts of murder and 1 count of conspiracy to commit murder. 

When the trial was over, Randolph’s attorneys told CourtTV that they weren’t surprised by the verdict. They said that the jury was focused on how crass and unlikeable Tom was. 

His attorneys told CourtTV reporters that for the jurors, 2 key pieces of evidence were the most persuasive. One was the 911 call Tom made and other was the the second interview he gave to the police. The jurors also did not like Tom’s relationship with Mike; they could tell there was something off about it. 

What really strikes me about that is this – In Part 1, we told you that when the Las Vegas Metro detectives originally approached the District Attorneys seeking to have Tom arrested on charges of conspiracy and murder,  the DAs were doubtful there was enough evidence to convict. They wanted the detectives to do more digging into Tom’s history. 

The detectives did that, and they uncovered the details of Becky’s suspicious death and Tom’s involvement, as well as everything about Francis, Kathryn, and Gayna. But it was Becky’s case, that evidence, that resulted in the 2017 conviction being overturned. 

And in the end, in 2023, Tom was found guilty mainly on the original evidence the detectives had collected – his statements to the police and the 911 call. I find that really interesting and I think we’ll talk more about that in this week’s Swing Shift bonus episode. 

 [John] 

Tom’s sentencing was delayed when Tom’s attorneys filed a 700-page motion to have the charges against him dismissed. The large portions of the motion were handwritten by Tom himself. The Review-Journal described the document as rambling and illegible. 

The document did not persuade the judge and his sentencing was put off for only about 6 months. The sentencing was held on April 4, 2024, just last month

During the sentencing, DA Christopher Hammer said, “I don’t think there’s anything that I can say that compares to the actions of Mr. Randolph in this case. The reality is his actions — back in 2008 — have rippled for year after year after year, and will continue to do so.”

Tom was given the chance to speak before his sentence was imposed, and the statement he made to the court is indescribably bizarre and shameful. For every compliment he gave to Sharon, he turned around and insulted her in the next breath. 

He made some unsubstantiated allegations against Colleen and Sharon too, claiming the two of them were the ones who were conspiring to kill Colleen’s husband. 

He also kept referring to Mike Miller as “Uncle Mikey” which was creepy and completely unbelievable that anyone in his family ever called him that. His entire statement was extremely disrespectful to Colleen and all of Sharon’s loved ones, as well as to Mike’s family, and was an insult to the judge’s intelligence. 

DA Hammer summed it up perfectly, “He’s never going to take responsibility. It’s always going to be someone else’s fault. So that’s what you saw today.”

In the end, was sentenced to 60 years to life, and he did receive credit for nearly 15 years of time served. He isn't eligible for parole until 2059

Colleen Beyer expressed her immense relief when it was over saying, “It’s been 15 years, and it’s been a twisted nightmare”

In 2010, Colleen filed a civil case against Tom Randolph and after 8 years, the judge issued her a judgment of $12 million. It’s unclear how much of that money, if anything she’ll ever receive from him. 

[Shaun] 

Many of the cases we’ve covered here involve physical violence in the form of assaults and gun violence. This one is a bit different but equally insidious. Tom Randolph was and is a master manipulator. He got 6 women to marry him shortly after meeting him, and if he’s to be believed he had even more fiancees in his life.

He used his charm to lure these women in, and inflicted mental, emotional, and physical abuse on them, all while setting up life insurance policies on them, getting them addicted to drugs, and hoping he could find a person to murder them for the insurance money. It was a pattern he repeated again and again. If Tom had been found guilty in 1988 at least two lives would have been saved, and so many fewer lives would have been destroyed. 

Patterns of abuse aren't always obvious, sometimes the abusers can be seen as “great dads” but it's still important to look for and recognize these signs of abuse however it manifests.

[John]

If you’re enjoying the podcast, please tell your friends, and leave us a review on your preferred podcast platform. If you want to listen ad-free, please consider joining our Patreon or by subscribing on Apple podcasts. Just visit sinspod.co/subscribe

Thanks for listening, and we remind you, what happens here, happens everywhere.