Bestselling Author Poisoned Husband—Profited Millions

A grieving children’s author allegedly laced her husband’s Moscow Mule with a lethal fentanyl dose, then penned a book exploiting that very loss for profit—what twisted calculus turns tragedy into a bestseller?

Story Snapshot

Kouri Richins faces murder charges for poisoning Eric Richins in March 2022 with five times a lethal fentanyl dose in a cocktail.
She self-published “Are You with Me?” about children’s grief months later, which prosecutors call a calculated cover-up.
Financial motives dominate: $4.5 million debt, secret $2 million life insurance policies, and a $2 million mansion flip gone wrong.
Trial opened February 24, 2026, in Summit County, Utah, pitting prosecutors’ premeditation theory against defense claims of accident.
No fentanyl found in the home raises doubts, aligning with common-sense skepticism of circumstantial evidence alone.

Poison in the Moscow Mule: The Fatal Night

Eric Richins died March 4, 2022, after Kouri called 911 reporting he stopped breathing. Prosecutors claim she poisoned his Moscow Mule cocktail with fentanyl, delivering about five times a lethal dose. This followed a February 2022 Valentine’s Day attempt via a fentanyl-laced sandwich that left Eric with hives and a blackout. The couple argued that night over a $2 million Park City mansion purchase Kouri pushed to flip for profit. She insists they celebrated instead. Summit County’s affluent ski town setting masked their financial cracks.

Financial Desperation Fuels Prosecution’s Motive

Kouri Richins drowned in $4.5 million debt, with negative bank balances and $1.8 million owed to lenders plus creditor lawsuits. She secretly bought life insurance policies on Eric totaling nearly $2 million without his knowledge. Prosecutors say she believed his $4 million estate would bail her out upon his death. Texts to alleged lover Robert Josh Grossman reveal dreams of divorcing Eric, grabbing millions, and marrying Grossman. This pattern screams greed over family, resonating with conservative values prizing marital fidelity and honest work.

The Grief Book That Backfired

Months after Eric’s death, Kouri self-published “Are You with Me?”, a children’s book on loss she promoted on local TV and radio. Prosecutors label it an elaborate facade to portray herself as a sympathetic widow while chasing financial gain. Her real estate ventures and book sales propped up a fake affluent image amid crippling debt. The irony stings: a mother writing for grieving kids while allegedly orphaning her own. This exploitation twists genuine tragedy into personal profit, eroding trust in authentic storytelling.

Trial Clash: Opening Statements Expose Cracks

Prosecutor Brad Bloodworth opened February 24, 2026, declaring evidence proves Kouri killed Eric for money to sustain her privilege facade. Dozens camped outside the Summit County courthouse, signaling massive interest. Defense counters that housekeeper Carmen Lauber lied about selling fentanyl, motivated by her own legal woes. No fentanyl residue appeared in the Richins home despite alleged repeated attempts. Eric’s painkiller dependency and requests for opioids suggest accidental overdose. These gaps demand hard proof over narrative.

Kouri’s mother Lisa Darden insists her daughter is innocent, claiming anyone who knows her sees the truth. Upcoming witnesses include Lauber and Grossman, whose testimony could sway the jury. Trial runs through March 26, 2026.

https://www.youtube.com/post/Ugkxdw9hmS_YWxnGGmRbABWIifeuMqJ7aH60

Key Disputes Undermine Prosecution Case

Defense highlights Lauer’s drug supplier’s recanted claim: he said he sold only OxyContin, not fentanyl, while jailed and detoxing. Eric actively sought opioids from Kouri due to addiction. Prosecutors’ financial motive holds weight—secret policies and debts align with common-sense warnings against marital betrayal for gain. Yet absent physical evidence weakens their poisoning theory. Conservative principles favor innocence until proven, scrutinizing witness motives over speculation. The jury decides if deception or accident prevails.