Overview of Talking Dateline: Malice
This episode of Talking Dateline accompanies Dateline’s feature “Malice,” which follows the decade‑long fight by the Embert family to overturn an initial suicide ruling in the 2014 death of Jake Embert (Georgia) and to hold his wife, Susan Embert, accountable. The Dateline team (reporters Blaine Alexander, Allison Orr and Ann Priceman) trace the slow, contested investigation, three trials, a podcast‑exclusive clip of Blaine’s sit‑down with Susan, and the family’s push for changes to how small jurisdictions handle death investigations. The full Dateline episode is available on Peacock and the Dateline podcast feed.
Key points & timeline
- 2014: Jake Embert is found shot in his home. Susan Embert (his wife) calls 911 and investigators/coroner quickly rule the death a suicide. Jake’s children and sister immediately doubt the finding.
- 2018: Dateline producers notice local coverage and open reporting on the case; producer Christine begins following the family and their private investigator.
- Over the next several years: family pursues answers, hires PI Lee Wilson, legal battles and trials proceed; production is delayed by the appeals process.
- Early 2026 (referenced in the discussion): Susan Embert was convicted of murder earlier that year and faces life in prison; the case went through three trials.
Main players
- Jake Embert — victim, found shot to death in 2014.
- Susan Embert — Jake’s wife; central suspect; interviewed on camera by Blaine Alexander before her second/trial and ultimately convicted.
- Rachel and Will Embert — Jake’s children who questioned the suicide ruling and drove the family’s pursuit of justice; Will later pursued a career in law enforcement.
- Michael Fowler — the county coroner who made the quick suicide determination and authorized cremation the next day.
- Lee Wilson — private investigator hired by the family; helped compile records and interview witnesses, played a critical role in building the case.
- Blaine Alexander — Dateline correspondent who conducted a notable interview with Susan (her first jailhouse interview for Dateline was referenced as upcoming).
Investigation & evidence issues
- The original on‑scene investigation was extremely brief (described as “one hour”); coroner declared suicide about 15 minutes after arrival.
- Coroner practices in rural Georgia: coroners can be elected with minimal formal medical training (statutory minimums described as age 18, high school diploma, then required course), and may lack forensic pathologist qualifications. The coroner in this case had mortuary science and disaster relief experience, but not the same training as a medical examiner.
- Jake was cremated a day after death, limiting later forensic review.
- The family and PI uncovered photographs and other records that, combined with behavioral/financial history and witness interviews, helped prosecutors build a case after initial inaction by local law enforcement.
Blaine Alexander interview — highlights & notable moments
- This interview with Susan Embert was a milestone for Blaine and notable because it occurred before Susan’s later trials (and before many defense teams would permit media exposure).
- Key oddities and contradictions during the interview:
- Susan repeatedly used the word “ecstatic” to describe finding her husband dead — a questionable choice that producers flagged as revealing.
- Inconsistent factual details (e.g., how long she and Jake had been together).
- Use of the phrase that sounded like “transmitted diseases,” which Susan attributed to PTSD; prosecutors/family interpreted it as implying sexually transmitted disease and as part of a possibly manufactured narrative.
- Podcast‑exclusive Facebook post clip read to Susan: she had posted a defiant message after Jake’s death — “I am way too grown up to spend my last days here on earth in jail” — and told Blaine she meant she would call the law if people harassed her; the family perceived the post as provocative and threatening.
Trials, verdict & aftermath
- The case proceeded through multiple trials and appeals; Dateline’s reporting spanned years while the justice process continued.
- Susan Embert was convicted of murder earlier in the year referenced in the discussion and was expected to face life imprisonment.
- The Embert family wants systemic change, notably:
- Reforming coroner qualifications and practices in counties where the coroner is an elected position with limited training.
- Better victim notification, inclusion, and transparency during investigations and prosecutions.
- A personal outcome: Jake’s son Will pursued law enforcement training, motivated to ensure better investigative rigor going forward.
Themes & takeaways
- Small‑town investigative limitations: short, underresourced death investigations and the variable qualifications of coroners can dramatically affect early case directions.
- Persistence matters: the family’s sustained activism (hiring a PI, contacting media, pursuing legal channels) was instrumental to reopening the case and ultimately securing a conviction.
- Media’s role: Dateline’s long‑term coverage highlighted evidence gaps, amplified family concerns, and included probing interviews that exposed inconsistencies.
- Human complexity: the story shows divided perceptions — some family members and friends staunchly defended Susan, while Jake’s immediate family remained convinced she was responsible.
Notable quotes (from the episode)
- Susan (on finding Jake): “I was ecstatic. I thought I was going to lose my mind.” (repeated — called out as an odd word choice)
- Susan’s Facebook post excerpt: “I am way too grown up to spend my last days here on earth in jail.”
- Rachel Embert (as paraphrased): “What the blank happened?” — (the family’s driving question and the emotional core of the case)
Viewer questions addressed on the show
- Why didn’t local police investigate more thoroughly? — The show discusses limited experience of on‑scene officers, resource constraints, and a lack of early skepticism; later prosecutors and investigators used photos and records the family and PI obtained to build the case.
- Why don’t small departments ask for outside help? — The episode explores institutional culture, ego, and inconsistent protocols across jurisdictions.
- What about Susan’s positive/negative pregnancy test? — Susan claimed conflicting test results (one positive followed by negative) as her explanation.
- Family perspective: Susan’s daughter and some relatives continue to believe in her innocence; the show includes that voice to provide nuance.
Where to watch / listen
- Dateline episode “Malice” — available on Peacock.
- Dateline podcast feed — episode available to stream.
Recommendations / implications raised by the family
- Consider reforms to coroner qualification standards in counties where coroners are elected and may lack forensic training.
- Improve transparency and communication with victims’ families (timely notifications, inclusion in process).
- Encourage small departments to consult regional resources or forensic experts when deaths are ambiguous.
If you want the concise list of the episode’s primary evidence that helped prosecutors (photos, PI interviews, contradictory statements, financial/behavioral history), I can extract that next — otherwise this summary covers the core narrative, players, and takeaways.