Inconsistencies in 911 call led to new push in 2013 killing #shorts | Forensic Files

So then what made investigators want to revisit the case eight years later? I mean because they were working with the
exact same evidence that they had back in 2013, right? So in 2020 we have uh Corporal Greg Allen, right? So he's
assigned to take a second look at open homicide cases for his troop and I think it's like a 4count area. Um, and when he
looks at the Rakuba case, he looks at the evidence that's in the file, that 911 call from Bruno where almost
immediately he starts changing his story. I mean, within seconds of speaking to the 911 operator, he says
something along the lines of, you know, we were fighting, but then later he claims uh that he wasn't arguing with
Melissa, and then he says later on, well, I was playing with the gun and I let it go off. I mean, for Corporal
Allen and then Corporal Dan Nylon who came on to the case, it seemed like this was a case that would be open and shut.
And then they were able to convince the DA's office. And then once you do that, you have additional resources now that
maybe weren't available to the original investigators. So, they were able to hire a forensics expert and then they
were really able to take a second look at the evidence.

Brief Summary

Investigators reopened the Rakuba case due to inconsistencies in the 911 call and new forensic resources.

Key points

Revisiting the Case. Investigators take a second look at the Rakuba case after eight years, uncovering inconsistencies.

Episode highlights

Revisiting the CaseInvestigators take a second look at the Rakuba case after eight years, uncovering inconsistencies.“It seemed like this was a case that would be open and shut.”0:51Jan 28, 2026

Episode quotes

We were fighting, but then later he claims he wasn't arguing.

Bruno's inconsistent statements during the 911 call.

0:34WatchJan 28, 2026

More from 48 Hours

Solve the Crime

Read a real case one clue at a time, then see how your call held up against the investigators.