Did Thomas Randolph Hire A Hitman Then Kill Him?

Netflix’s new docuseries has revived interest in a Las Vegas case that hinges on one question: did Thomas Randolph hire a handyman to kill his sixth wife, then murder the handyman to silence him? The theory has survived two trials and multiple appeals, and the latest court ruling in 2026 keeps the story in headlines.

Insurance policy as motive

Prosecutors laid out a timeline that started with a $360,000 life-insurance policy on Sharon Causse. Randolph stood to collect if she died, and records showed he had taken similar policies on earlier wives who also died. The pattern gave the state a framework for arguing the 2008 killings were not random.

Detectives noted Randolph increased coverage just months before the shootings. Bank statements and agent testimony placed the policy’s payout squarely in front of jurors. The numbers framed every later claim of self-defense.

Defense attorneys countered that the policy was routine for a couple planning retirement. They argued coincidence, not conspiracy. Jurors in the second trial weighed the policy against other evidence and still returned guilty verdicts.

Handyman brought into the circle

Michael Miller, 38, had worked odd jobs at the Randolph house for roughly $600 a week. Phone records logged more than three hundred calls between the two men in the weeks before the murders. Friends told police Miller had mentioned a “white guy” who supplied him a gun and talked about easy money.

One witness recalled Miller saying Randolph offered payment to kill his wife. Another remembered Miller leaving the house with a revolver Randolph supposedly provided. Prosecutors used these statements to argue Miller had been recruited, not randomly encountered.

Miller’s family described a man looking for steady work after moving to Las Vegas. They said he never mentioned plans for violence. The portrait painted Miller as a disposable accomplice rather than a career criminal.

Scene that raised questions

On the night of May 8, 2008, Randolph called 911 claiming an intruder had killed his wife and that he had shot the intruder in self-defense. The masked man on the floor was Miller, shot five times, including once in the head. Police found no sign of forced entry.

Crime-scene photos showed Causse shot once in the head while seated. Blood-spatter analysts testified the angle suggested an execution-style killing, not a struggle. The absence of defensive wounds on Miller also undercut a chaotic shoot-out story.

Detectives noticed Randolph’s 911 statements changed between the call and the later walkthrough. He first said he did not know the intruder; later he identified Miller as someone who “ripped him off.” Prosecutors called the shift evidence of improvisation.

First trial and reversal

In 2017 a jury convicted Randolph on two murder counts and conspiracy. He received a death sentence. The Nevada Supreme Court later overturned the verdict, ruling that evidence from a 1980s Utah case had been improperly admitted. The prior-bad-acts material included Randolph’s acquittal in his second wife’s death and a witness-tampering conviction.

The reversal forced prosecutors to build a narrower case. They stripped references to earlier wives and focused only on the 2008 events. The strategy preserved the core claim that Randolph hired Miller and then eliminated him.

Retrial scheduling stretched into 2023. Randolph remained in custody at the Clark County Detention Center while motions over speedy-trial rights moved through the courts. The delay kept the case in local headlines for years.

Retrial evidence narrowed

Without the Utah history, prosecutors leaned on phone logs, insurance documents, and witness statements about Miller’s final weeks. They replayed the 911 inconsistencies and the ballistics report. The streamlined presentation lasted roughly two weeks.

Defense counsel argued Miller might have acted alone after a financial dispute. They suggested Randolph’s changing statements reflected shock, not guilt. Jurors rejected that framing within a day of deliberation.

The second jury convicted Randolph on the same counts. In April 2024 he received 60 years to life, sparing the state another death-penalty phase given his age. The sentence closed the trial chapter but left appeals open.

Appeal denied in 2026

Randolph’s final appeal argued that the long wait between arrest and retrial violated his right to a speedy trial. The Nevada Supreme Court reviewed the timeline, including pandemic-related delays, and found no constitutional breach. The August 2026 ruling affirmed the conviction.

At 71, Randolph now serves his sentence at Lovelock Correctional Center. The decision removes the last routine legal avenue and shifts attention to possible federal habeas claims. Those filings rarely succeed but can extend the case for years.

Media outlets covering the ruling noted that the core allegation—hiring then killing the hitman—had now withstood two juries and two Supreme Court reviews. The legal record is settled for the moment.

Documentary revives public interest

Netflix released The Widower: ‘Til Death Do Us Part on September 30, 2026, just weeks after the appeal denial. The three-part series features interviews with Causse’s relatives, Miller’s brothers, and detectives who worked the original scene. It presents the insurance motive and the phone-record evidence in detail.

True-crime forums on Reddit and TikTok lit up with theories about Randolph’s earlier marriages. Clips of his sentencing denial—“I didn’t kill Sharon”—circulated widely. The show’s timing turned a local story into national water-cooler conversation.

Streaming numbers suggest the audience extends beyond typical true-crime viewers. Casual viewers cite the hitman twist as the element that keeps them watching. The series has also prompted renewed searches for court transcripts and 911 audio.

Family statements and lingering pain

Causse’s relatives have maintained that Randolph targeted her for money. One family member called him “one evil, evil monster” during the first trial. They attended both sentencings and spoke with documentary producers about the long wait for resolution.

Miller’s siblings expressed mixed emotions. They want accountability for their brother’s death but also recognition that he may have been manipulated. Their interviews in the Netflix series underscore how accomplices in murder-for-hire schemes are often victims, too.

Neither family has announced plans for civil suits. The criminal case’s conclusion may close that door, though attorneys have not ruled out future filings tied to insurance proceeds already collected.

Looking ahead

With appeals exhausted, the legal story of Thomas Randolph rests on the record built across two trials. The allegation that he hired Michael Miller, then killed him, now stands as the court’s accepted narrative. For families and viewers, the case illustrates how insurance motives and disposable accomplices can converge in a single fatal night.