In the case of Natalie Cochran v. West Virginia, a jury returned to court yesterday, January 30, 2025, with a verdict. Cochran stood trial for the murder of her husband, Michael Cochran who died on February 11, 2019, of an insulin overdose. After nine days of testimony from witnesses and experts, the jury deliberated for almost two hours before delivering a guilty verdict of murder in the first degree.
The jury was instructed to deliver a sentence on the tenth day of trial. Before deliberation, the judge announced the jury would need to determine whether Cochran should receive mercy in the form of parole. Although she did not plead for herself, her friends, children, and family pleaded for mercy. On the other side, Michael’s family pleaded for them to show no mercy in their decision. When they returned, they delivered a guilty verdict of first-degree murder with no possibility of parole.
Natalie Cochran’s Previous Fraud Conviction
In 2021, Cochran pleaded guilty and was sentenced for involvement and leadership in a Ponzi scheme. She defrauded investors of millions of dollars, including her parents-in-law, which could explain their bias in her trial. Justice was served, though, when she was sentenced to 135 months in prison for her crimes. Some documents show her husband, Michael, might have been involved, and his children testified on their mother’s behalf that he was aware of the scheme.
She was running her Ponzi scheme at the time of her husband’s death, and the prosecution claims she murdered him because she had only two choices: to come clean to him about her fraud or take him out. For the murder of her husband, Cochran was indicted in November 2021. However, the prosecution dismissed those charges in April 2023 to conduct further tests on Michael’s body. In October 2023, she was indicted again and accused of poisoning her husband with insulin. On January 15, 2025, her trial began for the murder of her husband.
Defense Expert Testimony
Cochran’s trial lasted for ten days. She refused to testify on her behalf even though she originally was expected to. It was for the best since her testimony might not have been taken seriously since the victim’s family described her as narcissistic and manipulative. She decided not to testify after two of their defense experts ruled Michael’s death undetermined and that the prosecution’s expert’s opinion could not be supported through an autopsy or anatomical findings. They noted that the second time Michael’s body was examined, he was far too decomposed to have any productive results.
The defense expert, Dr. Priya Banerjee, testified Michael’s urine sample revealed the presence of benzodiazepine, a controlled drug. He did not have a prescription for the drug, and Dr. Banerjee testified it could potentially be abused or misused to the point of causing sudden death due to heart arrhythmia. This seems like enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to consider Cochran innocent. Although the prosecution’s expert ruled his death a homicide, there is no evidence beyond his glucose levels to substantiate that statement. Michael could have administered the insulin himself.
Final Thoughts
The jury consisted of 8 women and 4 men. While the jury delivered a ‘no mercy’ guilty verdict, it is questionable how they reached such a decision. Michael Cochran had a problem with supplements and various drugs which is how the defense argued Natalie Cochran’s innocence. However, the prosecution created a bias against the defendant. They used her previous conviction of fraud against her the entire trial with no proof she poisoned her husband.
Cochran is not innocent by any means. She committed fraud, which she will do time for. But it is a reach for the prosecution to suggest she intentionally murdered her husband. Yes, she did have access to drugs, much like a pharmacist, and maybe that is how her husband was able to access them easily. With all the evidence, there was enough to cast doubt that she committed this crime. Cochran will serve her sentence concurrently with the federal sentence. She will appear in court on February 25, 2025, before Judge Volk for a formal sentencing.
