Amy Bosley--- SNAPPED

| 4 Comments | 0 TrackBacks
I was watching the show Forensic Files on night and I saw this case about a woman killing her husband. I found this case to be relevant to this class because of what she did when she murdered him.
The night that she decided to kill him, she called the police in a panic claiming someone had broken in to their home and was robbing it. During the 911 call she was crying and at one point (if you watch the video links below) she yelled at the him to not go upstairs to her children. During the call she said he had a gun, and by this point she was screaming to not shot her husband, and then fires were shot.
The police rushed to the Bosley's home and the house looked like it had been ripped apart like that from a break in. The window to the kitchen door was broken and the cabinets were all opened.
The police search went on for the man that broke in and killed Mr. Bosley. But it soon became focused on the evidence that was around the home. The window that was broken was found to have been broken from the inside instead of the outside. And another things just weren't adding up.
Also, Amy didn't think about her two young children who were still in the home. They became witnesses to what actually happened in the home that night. Which brings about the topic or children as witnesses in criminal cases and how much they know what is really going on.
This is an interesting case and the video provided below isn't from Forensic Files but from another show called Snapped.

Part #1

Part #2

Part #3

Also, here is an article about the case as well:

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL:


Any case on one of these TV shows is obviously a very interesting one. After reading your entry I searched further into this case online. The couple owned a business and Amy was in charge of the bookkeeping. She had gotten into financial trouble and the IRS was slowly closing in on them. The couple had an open relationship, and pictures were found containing images of her husband with other woman. The prosecution believes that these were deciding factors in Amy's murder of her husband. Like the case of NC v. Peterson, the open relationship was thoroughly discussed. The majority of people (I believe), including me, do not understand how an open relationship could ever work. So in a case like this, it is automatically deemed an important factor, when in reality it could quite the norm for the couple involved. I think that whichever party is available should be interviewed to see whether jealousy or other MARITAL problems played apart in the incident. Just because something is foreign to us does not mean we can assume it is the root of all problems.

This definitely reminds me of the show called Snapped on Oxygen. I have been watching this TV series for a couple of years now, and I am very interested in it. The thing I believe keeps me so interested, is asking myself WHY do these people all of a sudden SNAP and kill, usually ones they love? After looking into this exact case, I found a website that also shows some of the episodes from the TV show Snapped. Although this is a somewhat sad show, it is interesting to see what these murders go through to kill someone. Sometimes, they even explain what it going on in their heads which is also neat. It seems somewhat obscure to watch a show that is primarily about murder, but after taking several psych classes, as well as Psych and Law, it is sort of fun to apply different concepts and information that I have learned to better understand what's going on. Below is a link to the website.

This case seemed very strange to me, and I watched the episode of Snapped becoming more intriguied. I also am very interested, as are most people in this class, in what makes people change and act on strangers and even more odd, hurt and murder the people they love. I could never imagine harming someone I love or don't love! It seems to me that these people who jsut "snap" seem to have some other issues that they have kept bottled up before it explodes into something very dangerous, such as a muder. This case was very interesting, and after watching Snapped and reading more articles about this case, it started to all fall into place.

The part that really got to me was when the kids would have to stand trial on the opposite side of their mom. I feel like what the grandparents did to switch the sentence and make a plea bargain with Amy to get the minimum really probably helped the children later on in life, so they wouldn't have that emotional baggage of convicting their mom to whatever sentence she could have had. The type of psychological effect that was put on these children is horrifying to me. This mother already has deprived her children of growing up without her, and their father now, which can cause many emotional and mental unstabilities in the long run. There are many articles about mental health risks on children who have lost a parent very suddenly, so imagine having the knowledge that your mom killed your dad and having to try and cope with that on type of the presence of that parent gone.

I believe that for someone to be able to hurt someone that once loved, they have to have some type of emotional baggage, there is (most) always a reason, wheather is be money, family, cheating etc. After reading more about it, this case seems that Amy was using Bob for money and having some very shady deals occuring. This dispute was obivously focused solely on her husband because she didn't continue on her angry rage, to hurt her children. Needless to say this horrific act harmed many other people other than her husband.

ive seen the show snapped several times, and i think its a really interesting show. ive never seen this episode so i watched the youtube clips to get the full picture of the case. i thought it was really interesting to hear how traits that had been helpful to her in school (i.e. extreme organization), but ended up showing up in this crime. this can be seen in the extent she went to in order to avoid detection as the murderer. she staged her house to look like it had been robbed, she broke a window on a door to make it look like someone had broken in, and during her 911 call she screamed at an imaginary intruder not to hurt her children and husband. this amount of detail is actually pretty scary to makes me think she had been planning this for a long time. the part i found most interesting was how the investigation shifted from a mystery suspect committing robbery/homicide, to amy being the prime suspect for the murder of her husband. at first everything seemed to point to amy's story...but eventually little pieces of evidence not fitting into the story turned into major red flags that amy's story was entirely false.
i found this case extremely interesting. i think the police did an excellent job of not getting caught up in the robbery and really looking at all the evidence. if they hadn't noticed, for instance, that the window was actually broken from the inside, suspicion of amy may never have happened and they wouldn't have looked for other evidence to support that suspicion.

Leave a comment

Recent Entries

Welcome to Psychology & Law!
Familiarize yourself with the blog. You'll quickly notice that all of your assignments are listed here in chronological order.…
Using Movies
In time for Thursday's, please read the following link:  as well as the 3 resource links at the…
Book Selection
There are several options for you to choose from to do your book report. They are: Lush Life, The…