John Biggs Jr., 92, appeared in a wheelchair as lawyers debated bail after his wife was found dead in their Goodyear home.
GOODYEAR, Ariz. — Court staff spent nearly 20 minutes trying to make sure 92-year-old John “Jack” Biggs Jr.’s hearing aids worked before a judge considered whether the retired state trooper accused of killing his wife should remain jailed on a $1 million bond.
The practical difficulty of conducting the hearing illustrated an unusual feature of the case: The defendant is a nonagenarian who uses a wheelchair, has significant hearing limitations and, according to his son and defense lawyer, had recently begun behaving in ways that raised concerns about possible cognitive decline. Prosecutors nevertheless described an intentional and violent attack on 89-year-old Jane Biggs inside the couple’s Goodyear home. A judge sided with the prosecution on bond, while the larger questions about Biggs’ mental condition and criminal responsibility remained unresolved in the public material reviewed for this story.
Defense attorney Zach Murphy urged the court to look beyond the accusation itself when deciding whether Biggs should be released. He cited a lack of criminal history and Biggs’ roughly quarter-century career with Maryland State Police. Murphy also told the judge there appeared to be odd behavior that had not been present before. Biggs’ adult son had raised similar concerns with investigators, saying recent calls and messages from his father made him think Biggs might be experiencing dementia. The son became concerned enough to travel from out of state to the Arizona home.
The reviewed reports do not show that those concerns had, at that point, produced a formal court determination that Biggs was incompetent to stand trial. They also do not establish a publicly documented medical diagnosis of dementia. That distinction matters in a criminal case. Family observations about memory, paranoia or behavioral change can explain why relatives sought help or became concerned, but they are not the same as a judicial finding about whether a defendant understands court proceedings or can assist an attorney. Biggs’ reported decline therefore remains important context without resolving the legal questions that could follow from it.
Prosecutors focused on the allegations in the police investigation. Authorities say Biggs confronted Jane on Aug. 23 because he believed she had taken investment documents and money. Jane denied taking them, according to the account Biggs later gave investigators. Police say he became enraged and attacked her with a kitchen knife in their bedroom. Jane suffered multiple wounds, and investigators reported injuries on her hands and arms that they described as evidence she tried to defend herself. Her death was later classified as a homicide.
Authorities say Biggs remained in the house afterward and took a large quantity of sleeping pills in an apparent effort to end his own life. He then fell asleep in a recliner, according to court records cited by news organizations. The following day, his son arrived after the troubling communications that had prompted the trip. Police say Biggs told him he had stabbed Jane and warned him not to enter the bedroom. The son went inside, found Jane on the bed and summoned authorities. Officers arrived at about 1:30 p.m. Aug. 24.
Biggs was not immediately booked into jail. Police said he first received medical care and was taken into custody after being medically cleared. By Aug. 29, Goodyear police announced that he had been booked in Maricopa County. Initial reports identified accusations of second-degree murder and aggravated assault. One later account citing court records described a first-degree murder charge, creating a discrepancy in published descriptions of the precise homicide count. The reviewed sources do not provide enough later docket detail to resolve that discrepancy with confidence, so the charging language should not be treated as uniform across all reports.
At the bond proceeding, prosecutor Brooke Gaunt acknowledged Biggs’ age and lack of criminal history but emphasized what she described as the seriousness of the allegations. The state argued that his age did not eliminate the potential danger to others, particularly relatives. Murphy sought a substantially lower bond of $25,000. The judge instead set the amount at $1 million. FOX 10 Phoenix reported that, if Biggs posted bond, conditions would include electronic monitoring, house arrest and no contact with members of his family.
The hearing also offered a glimpse of the difficulties defense lawyers can face when an elderly client wants to speak before the legal strategy is settled. Biggs attempted to address the court about what happened, according to FOX 10, but Murphy stopped him and advised him not to continue. Defendants generally have the right to remain silent, and statements made early in a case can carry consequences later. The exchange did not establish a defense or provide a full account from Biggs. Instead, the allegations remained anchored mainly in the police affidavit and the statements investigators said he had already made.
Those statements included a claim that Jane had taken investment materials or money. Detectives wrote that Biggs believed he had lost everything. But Jane’s family has publicly disputed that explanation. Her son, Michael Cook, told Arizona’s Family that the couple’s financial arrangements did not allow Jane to take money from Biggs in the manner his reported account suggested. No reviewed source independently verified that Jane took money or documents. The alleged financial dispute is therefore evidence of what Biggs may have believed or claimed, not proof that Jane committed any financial act against him.
Jane’s relatives and neighbors have also sought to prevent the defendant’s reported condition from becoming the entire story. People in the Pebble Creek community remembered her as an active volunteer who welcomed residents and helped neighbors. She had been involved with Kare Bears, an organization built around neighbors assisting one another. Friends said she delivered welcome baskets and helped arrange rides. Family members also described her involvement with theater and church-related work. Those accounts provide context about the victim without bearing on the legal determination of Biggs’ guilt or mental condition.
The case presents several questions that public reporting had not answered by Oct. 19. The reviewed sources did not confirm a competency evaluation, a formal dementia diagnosis, a trial date or a final resolution of the homicide charge. Nor did they establish whether reported cognitive changes would become part of a legal defense. Such questions require medical evidence and court rulings, not assumptions based solely on a defendant’s age. Biggs’ prior career in law enforcement likewise neither proves nor disproves the allegations against him.
For now, the court record described in published reports leaves two sets of facts moving on parallel tracks. One concerns the evidence police say they found inside the home and Biggs’ alleged admissions. The other concerns an elderly defendant whose family reported a dramatic change in his behavior before the killing. A court will ultimately have to address the criminal accusations through established legal procedures. Until then, Biggs is presumed innocent, while Jane Biggs’ death remains classified as a homicide.
Author note: Last updated October 19, 2026.