Lead: In late March 2016, Dr. Henry Han, his wife Jennie and their 5-year-old daughter Emily were found shot to death in their Santa Barbara home. Investigators soon focused on Pierre Haobsh, a business associate, after evidence tied him to items purchased and removed from the crime scene; he was arrested in Oceanside within 48 hours. Haobsh later told contacts and detectives a sprawling conspiracy and even queried an online psychic about being caught. A judge found him guilty in November 2021; he was sentenced to three life terms without parole in April 2022.
Key Takeaways
- Victims: Dr. Henry Han, his wife Jennie, and their daughter Emily (three days shy of her 6th birthday) were killed in Santa Barbara on March 23–24, 2016.
- Fatal wounds: Autopsies showed 14 gunshot wounds total — three each to Henry and Jennie, and eight to Emily.
- Person of interest and arrest: Pierre Haobsh became a person of interest after a business contract and Home Depot footage linked him to materials investigators say matched items used to wrap the bodies; he was arrested in Oceanside within 48 hours.
- Physical evidence: Investigators recovered shell casings, a .22-caliber bullet fragment from pillows, a suspected murder weapon and suppressor in Haobsh’s car, victims’ phones wrapped to block tracking, and financial instruments tied to Dr. Han.
- Digital traces: Keylogger software was found on Haobsh’s and Dr. Han’s machines, and Haobsh’s searches included questions about skull penetration and ammunition choices in the days before the killings.
- Prosecution theory: Prosecutors argued Haobsh planned the murders to steal millions from Dr. Han and used deception to ingratiate himself with the family.
- Trial and sentence: After a bench trial begun in October 2021, Judge Brian Hill found Haobsh guilty on November 24, 2021; he received three life terms without parole on April 15, 2022.
- Appeals and petitions: Haobsh’s conviction was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal in January 2025 and a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court was denied.
Background
Dr. Henry Han emigrated from China into a family tradition of medicine and built a well-known holistic practice in Santa Barbara. He and his wife Jennie, who assisted in the clinic, were locally respected for blending traditional and alternative approaches; friends and patients described Henry as compassionate and his practice as drawing patients from across the country.
In early 2016 the Hans began exploring a product line using CBD and partnered with acquaintances, including Mark and Marla Palumbo, who worked in skincare. Pierre Haobsh — a younger, self-styled scientist with a checkered past in claims and investors’ disputes — entered their orbit as a supposed lab technician and development partner.
The Palumbos and others grew uneasy with Haobsh after what they described as questionable lab practices, suspicious charges on accounts and inconsistencies in his credentials. Despite warnings from friends and staff, Haobsh reportedly regained Henry’s trust in the days before the murders, culminating in a typed business agreement found in the Han home on the last day Henry was seen alive.
Main Event
On March 24, 2016, after failing to reach the Hans, friends and colleagues learned from a news report that the family had been discovered dead in their garage, wrapped in plastic. Deputies obtained a search warrant shortly before midnight and began documenting a scene that included bleaching agents, a washing machine filled with bloody bedding and pillows, and a distinct olfactory trace investigators described as attempts to obliterate evidence.
Crime scene analysts located a .22-caliber bullet and fragments in pillows in the laundry and matching shell casings among the wrappings. In the master bedroom detectives found a four-page contract listing Pierre Haobsh as a partner, and subsequent examination identified packaging and duct tape similar to material later tied to purchases captured on video.
Home Depot surveillance in Oceanside showed a man matching Haobsh’s DMV photo exiting with multiple large rolls of plastic wrap and duct tape. Investigators also traced the Hans’ missing phones moving south from Santa Barbara toward Oceanside; one of the victims’ phones continued to ping locations as it traveled, helping focus the manhunt.
Undercover and local units converged in Oceanside. Surveillance captured Haobsh meeting his father in a parking lot and transferring two large duffels; shortly after, Haobsh was stopped at an ARCO station and taken into custody. Officers later found Henry’s wallet, cards, phones wrapped in foil, an expended shell casing, and the alleged murder weapon with a threaded barrel and suppressor in Haobsh’s vehicle.
Within days, a key witness, TJ Direda, told detectives Haobsh had confessed to killing the Hans, giving specific details about how the bodies were wrapped and describing attempted removal of the corpses. Direda also said Haobsh admitted a motive involving siphoning roughly $20 million from Henry’s accounts.
Analysis & Implications
The case exposes multiple fault lines: the vulnerability of trust in close business relationships, the dangers of blurred lines in informal scientific partnerships, and how fraud motives can escalate to extreme violence. Haobsh’s pattern of fabricating credentials and large financial claims mirrors classic confidence schemes, but prosecutors argue this pattern culminated in a lethal scheme to access substantial funds.
For investigators, the case illustrates the power of ordinary retail surveillance, mobile-data analysis and basic forensic work—purchases captured on camera, shell casings matched to recovered ammunition, and a keylogger linking behavior on computers. Modern digital footprints enable prosecutors to construct detailed timelines that once would have been speculative.
Haobsh’s repeated assertions of elaborate conspiracies and claims of advanced energy technology complicated perceptions of his credibility and mental state. Defense counsel emphasized inconsistencies and alternative explanations for some physical evidence, while prosecutors stressed corroboration among independent evidence streams.
Legally, the prosecution’s decision to waive the death penalty in favor of a bench trial narrowed procedural variables and resulted in a relatively swift resolution. The affirmation on appeal and denial at the U.S. Supreme Court stage underscore how thorough forensic documentation and corroborated testimony can survive multi-level scrutiny.
Comparison & Data
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| March 22–23, 2016 | Haobsh allegedly at Hans’ home; contract signed March 22 |
| March 23–24, 2016 | Hans murdered; bodies discovered March 24 |
| Within 48 hours | Haobsh arrested in Oceanside with victims’ items in car |
| Oct 25, 2021 | Bench trial opening statements |
| Nov 24, 2021 | Judge finds Haobsh guilty |
| Apr 15, 2022 | Sentenced to three life terms without parole |
| Jan 2025 | Conviction affirmed by CA Court of Appeal |
These dates show how quickly investigators moved from discovery to arrest and how the judicial process then unfolded over years, with appeals and petitions extending into 2025. The case combined immediate investigative breakthroughs (video, purchases, physical evidence) with longer legal proceedings and appeal reviews.
Reactions & Quotes
“They’re all dead,”
Marla Palumbo, friend and business partner
Marla Palumbo’s immediate reaction upon discovering the news conveyed the shock felt by colleagues who had recently worked closely with Henry. The Palumbos described routine moments — dinners and playing games with Emily — that underscore the suddenness of the loss.
“The depravity I’ve never seen anything like it,”
Prosecutor Ben Ladinig
Prosecutor Ben Ladinig used that phrase to characterize both the brutality of the killings and the deliberate attempts to conceal evidence. He presented a mosaic of corroborating physical, digital and testimonial evidence to support the theory of financial motive and premeditation.
“Henry was the guy … in the alternative medicine world,”
Dr. Glenn Miller, colleague
Colleagues and patients emphasized Henry Han’s local reputation and the void his loss created in the community he served. Their testimony contextualized why the murders reverberated widely in Santa Barbara and beyond.
Unconfirmed
- Claims that Haobsh was being targeted or shot at in the days before the murders are Haobsh’s assertions and remain unsubstantiated by independent evidence in the public record.
- Haobsh’s allegations of a shadowy plot involving the Department of Energy or oil companies to suppress his purported energy technology are unproven and were not corroborated at trial.
- Any involvement by Haobsh’s father beyond transferring duffel bags during the arrest sequence was investigated but not charged; definitive evidence linking him to the killings was not presented publicly.
Bottom Line
The deaths of Henry, Jennie and Emily Han ended three lives and left a community grappling with betrayal, grief and questions about how a purportedly trusted associate could allegedly carry out such a plan. Investigators relied on a combination of old-fashioned detective work, retail surveillance and digital forensics to build a timeline that tied Pierre Haobsh to purchases, the scene and the victims’ property.
Beyond this single prosecution, the case highlights persistent risks when informal scientific claims meet private financing and personal trust. It also demonstrates that in modern criminal investigations, seemingly mundane records — a receipt, a store video clip, a keystroke log — can be decisive.
For the Han family’s friends and patients, legal closure does not erase the loss. Appeals and petitions have been exhausted through available channels up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and Haobsh remains imprisoned under multiple life terms. The wider lessons concern vetting partners, safeguarding digital and financial access, and the ongoing need for communities to balance openness with caution.