Fact 5: No indicators of suicide.

When a death happens without warning, families are left in a kind of silence that feels unbearable. There are no answers, only questions that replay again and again. As Jaren’s mom, I found myself doing something I never imagined I would have to do – carefully retracing his final hours, trying to understand how his ordinary day could end with his death.

I went back through his last 24 hours – where he went, who he spoke to, what he was planning. Investigators call this “building a timeline*.” I learned it means looking at events hour by hour. I did this because the Guam Police Department did not. What emerged was a picture of a young man living his life.

*According to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Death Investigation: A Guide for the Scene Investigator (July 2024), building a timeline is a central part of how detectives piece together events, test their theories, and identify possible suspects. 

Jaren was following his regular routine.

He walked his dog, had coffee, cleaned his apartment, and did laundry. He messaged his sister to say hello. He told me he had run into someone we knew. He contacted a friend to see if she was working and sent photos of items he was thinking about buying at the store. These are not the actions of someone withdrawing or unraveling.

He was thinking ahead.

Jaren was shopping and making plans for the following day. He had things he wanted to do and places he intended to go.

There were no warning signs.

Jaren had no history of depression, no prior attempts, no note, and no messages suggesting hopelessness or despair. Nothing in his behavior, communication, or plans suggest any warning signs on April 1, 2023.

This matters. When every detail of a person’s final day points in the same direction, it is deeply troubling to accept a conclusion that ignores those facts. Despite this, the Guam Police Department theorized Jaren’s death was a suicide just one hour and forty-seven minutes after arriving on the scene. That conclusion was made even though there were contradictions in the only witness statement.

Witness Statement that Doesn’t Match the Day.

Mariana told police that Jaren suddenly became emotional and sad after she said she would not move in with him. As his mom, I knew immediately that this description is not who my son was.

I expected these inconsistencies to be investigated carefully. Instead, police released the scene and did not return until days later, when the medical examiner asked for additional information. During a meeting on September 21, 2023, the Chief of Police stated, “She lawyered up, so we could not question her.” Having an attorney does not end an investigation. Digital records, third-party confirmation, forensic testing, or surveillance footage could still have been examined. None of that happened.

The Move-In Story Doesn’t Hold Up.

The claim that Jaren was devastated by a sudden decision not to move in is also contradicted by the facts.

Mariana arrived Friday afternoon with a single backpack. That strongly suggests she planned to stay overnight or for the weekend, not to move in permanently. There was also no moving activity. Although Jaren had taken the day off work, Saturday was spent running errands, getting coffee, shopping, and Mariana getting her eyelashes done.

There were no boxes, no furniture being moved, no belongings brought over. If the entire day passed without any effort to move, it makes little sense that a decision after 3:00 PM would suddenly overwhelm him. After a full day of ordinary plans and normal conversation, I could not understand how one moment could be framed as a crisis, especially when nothing else supports that version of events.

Why the Statement Lacks Credibility.

Something as final as a suicide determination should not be based on an unverified statement, especially when that statement conflicts with the evidence.

In this case, there was no forensic evidence to support her account. There were no messages, searches, or calls showing distress or intent. There was no history of behavior that would suggest suicide risk. And there was no third party who could confirm what she claimed happened.

When one person is the only witness, benefits from the conclusion, and provides a story that does not align with the facts, that account deserves careful examination, not automatic acceptance.

No Indicators of Suicide.

I learned that suicide determinations rely on patterns, not isolated claims. Investigators look for changes in behavior, signs of distress, or expressions of intent over time. In Jaren’s case, those patterns were completely absent.

There was no suicide note. No history of depression or mental illness. No prior thoughts or attempts. No major stressors or behavioral changes. No verbalized intent to anyone.

A Life Moving Forward.

One of the strongest indicators against suicide is forward-looking behavior. Jaren had that in abundance. He had a stable job and was continuing his education. He maintained close relationships and had applied for a position that would advance his career. He planned to visit his grandmother the next day. He and I were discussing a possible condominium investment.

Even his apartment reflected a life in motion. It was clean and organized. Laundry was in the washer and dryer. The refrigerator was stocked with healthy food. A delivery of vegan protein powder arrived a week later, something he had ordered for himself, for the future he expected to have.

National medical guidelines make clear that a suicide determination requires evidence that a death was self-inflicted and that the person intended to die or understood the likely outcome. In Jaren’s case, there is no psychological evidence of intent. The physical evidence, particularly the gunshot location and range, discussed in earlier posts, warrants further investigation. Even the medical examiner raised concerns, not only about whether the death was accidental or self-inflicted, but whether it could have been a homicide.

What the facts show me is a young man living a full, ordinary life and planning for what came next. Any conclusion that ignores that truth is flawed.