Jane Biggs’ relatives wanted her remains returned to Maryland but said existing authorization paperwork created an unexpected obstacle after her death.
GOODYEAR, Ariz. — The family of 89-year-old Jane Biggs had already learned that police considered her death a homicide when relatives encountered another problem: The husband accused of killing her still occupied a key place in paperwork affecting who could authorize plans for her remains.
Jane’s family told Arizona’s Family in early September that they wanted her cremated and returned to Maryland. But John “Jack” Biggs Jr., her 92-year-old husband, had been listed ahead of other relatives in relevant decision-making documents, the family said. By then, he was in the Maricopa County jail, accused of killing Jane inside their Goodyear home. The family expected an alternative authorization through a medical examiner or coroner after a waiting period, but the delay added a bureaucratic burden to a case already involving grief, a criminal investigation and questions about Biggs’ reported cognitive decline.
Michael Cook, Jane’s son, said he had held power-of-attorney responsibilities for years before paperwork connected to his mother’s later life placed Biggs first and Cook second. The exact legal effect of each document was not fully detailed in the reviewed reporting, and power-of-attorney authority generally does not remain a simple substitute for all post-death decisions. The family’s immediate concern was practical rather than theoretical: They wanted to proceed with cremation, and they said the normal authorization route had become complicated because the person ahead of them in the paperwork was the defendant in Jane’s homicide case.
The unusual aftermath grew out of events that investigators say took place on Aug. 23. According to court documents cited by several news organizations, Biggs accused Jane of taking investment documents or money. He later told detectives that he confronted her inside the home and became enraged after she denied his accusation. Police allege that he attacked her with a kitchen knife. Authorities said Jane suffered several wounds and had injuries on her hands and arms consistent with trying to defend herself. Her death was classified as a homicide.
Jane’s relatives have disputed the financial premise in Biggs’ reported statement to police. Cook told Arizona’s Family that his mother could not simply take Biggs’ investment money in the manner Biggs appeared to believe. No reviewed source independently verified that Jane had removed money or investment documents. That makes the distinction between motive and belief especially important. Investigators can describe what a suspect said prompted an argument, but such a statement does not establish that the underlying suspicion was true. The criminal case concerns Biggs’ alleged actions, not proof of wrongdoing by Jane.
The first person from the family to encounter the scene was Biggs’ adult son, who lived out of state. According to investigators, he had received troubling calls and messages from his father in the preceding weeks and grew concerned about his mental state. He told authorities that Biggs appeared to be showing signs he associated with dementia. The communications eventually prompted him to travel to Arizona. When he entered the residence on Aug. 24, he found his father in a recliner. Police say Biggs told his son he had stabbed Jane and warned him not to enter the bedroom.
The son then found Jane in the bedroom and contacted authorities. Goodyear officers responded at about 1:30 p.m. and pronounced her dead. Investigators said Biggs had remained in the home after the attack and had taken numerous pills in what they described as an apparent attempt to take his own life. He received medical treatment before he was taken to jail. Goodyear police announced Aug. 29 that he had been medically cleared and booked. The timing meant the family was dealing almost simultaneously with a homicide investigation, the defendant’s hospitalization and decisions about Jane’s remains.
Those administrative issues also unfolded while relatives tried to reassert Jane’s identity beyond the allegations recorded in the police affidavit. Family members said she had spent decades building a life in Arizona. She had been involved in theater and helped with a church thrift shop. Neighbors in Pebble Creek remembered her participation in Kare Bears, a community organization whose volunteers help other residents. Friends said Jane welcomed newcomers with baskets and helped people get to appointments. Her sister, Carole Pierie, described Jane as her best friend.
The family’s public comments also reflected unresolved questions about the relationship. Cook characterized Biggs as controlling, while Pierie said she and Jane had done many things together before Biggs became part of Jane’s life. Those statements represent the relatives’ perceptions and have not been adjudicated as findings in the criminal case. They nevertheless show why the family did not accept the reported financial argument as a complete explanation for the killing. Cook said relatives might never understand the reason Jane died.
Biggs’ defense, meanwhile, has drawn attention to a different set of circumstances. Attorney Zach Murphy told a judge that Biggs had no criminal history, had served for about 25 years as a Maryland State Police trooper and appeared to have developed unusual behavior relatively recently. His son’s statements about possible dementia were also raised. At a bond hearing, Biggs appeared in a wheelchair, and court staff needed substantial time to get his hearing aids working so he could understand the proceeding. The reviewed sources do not establish a formal dementia diagnosis or a judicial ruling that Biggs was incompetent.
Prosecutors urged the judge not to treat age or prior public service as reasons to minimize the alleged conduct. They cited the seriousness of Jane’s injuries and argued that Biggs continued to present a danger. His lawyer sought a $25,000 bond, while the court ultimately set bond at $1 million. FOX 10 Phoenix reported that if he posted the money, he would be subject to house arrest, electronic monitoring and restrictions on family contact. Initial reporting identified second-degree murder and aggravated assault allegations, although one later account citing court records described a first-degree murder charge.
The charging discrepancy illustrates another reason to avoid treating the first days of a criminal investigation as a complete record. Booking accusations, prosecutor filings and later court documents can differ as a case moves forward. Public reports available for this story did not provide enough subsequent docket information to establish a final charging history through Oct. 19. They also did not establish a final trial outcome, a competency decision or another disposition that would resolve the allegations. Biggs therefore remains entitled to the presumption of innocence.
For Jane’s family, however, the criminal case was only one of the systems they had to navigate. Their account of the cremation delay showed how paperwork created before a death can become difficult when circumstances change in a way few families anticipate. The relatives said they expected the medical examiner or coroner to provide a path forward after the necessary waiting period. Public reporting reviewed for this story did not confirm the ultimate disposition of Jane’s remains, so it would be inaccurate to state that the issue was resolved.
The enduring facts are narrower. Jane Biggs died by homicide inside her Goodyear home. Her husband was arrested and accused in the killing after police say he admitted attacking her. Her family disputed the financial allegation he reportedly offered investigators and remembered Jane as a volunteer, neighbor, sister and mother. And as the criminal process began, the family found that even arranging what came after her death could not be separated easily from the man charged in connection with it.
Author note: Last updated October 19, 2026.