4:00 p.m., June 7, 2011: University Club Tower, Tulsa
Downtown traffic moves like a pulse around 17th and South Carson. The University Club Tower—1960s round, p-shaped apartments built by early computer-aided design—casts curved shadows over the parking structure. A 911 call comes in: a man has gone out a window; from the street, a witness counts floors. “Seventeenth? Nineteenth?” The confusion is immediate; the horror is not.

Inside the couple’s 25th-floor unit, the living-room window is shattered. Glass is clustered nearby. The candlesticks near the window—thin, wire, tall—stand oddly undisturbed. The rest of the room looks like any busy home on a weekday: ordinary clutter, packed bags near the door.

On the eighth-floor parking deck, responders secure the area and confirm what no one wants to hear. The fall is over. The chaos begins.

### The Immediate Statements
– Witness across the street: saw him face-first, flailing, screaming.
– Window repair crew: one in the bedroom fixing a cracked pane; one near the living-room window; heard shouting, glass breaking, and “No, no, no.”
– Neighbors: heard running just before the crash.

Minutes later, the wife—19 years old, 7 months pregnant—comes downstairs. She screams, pleads, and cradles him, then goes upstairs, then to the station. Her grandmother arrives to sit beside her, to say nothing more than the most important legal sentence in the world: “Do not talk until your attorney gets here.” The camera records what happens next.

 

## II. The Room With The Camera

### The Recording That Wouldn’t Stop
The interrogation room is plain. A table, two chairs, a closed door. The camera is already rolling. Amber’s grandmother tells her to ask for a lawyer. To wait. To say nothing. Amber keeps talking: about love, about regret, about guilt, about the push. “I pushed him.” Her grandmother tries to reframe—“Don’t say that; they’ll take it as intentional”—but the words are already in the air, already in the file, already in the future trial.

Key moments, unfiltered:
– Amber wonders whether Josh prayed or cursed her name as he fell.
– She describes wanting to go back and “take back the push… just catch him.”
– She asks if not speaking will “make me guilty,” and her grandmother repeats: it makes the lawyer do his job.
– She circles the detail: “He was messing with the TV… the window’s right here… I pushed and he fell through the window.”

The officers step in, ask basics. Amber’s family insists the recording is unfair. Law enforcement cites the rule: no reasonable expectation of privacy. The tape stands.

—

## III. The Marriage, The Month, The Day

### The Relationship People Called “Volatile”
Both families say the couple fought hard and often. Amber’s side says Josh was verbally abusive, unpredictable after leaving the Air Force, and involved with drugs. Josh’s side points to incidents he reported, including a protective order filed one month before the fall, after Amber allegedly struck him with a lamp hard enough to need 21 stitches. There are more allegations—stairs, arguments, injuries—documented and undocumented, filed and unfiled.

### The Day’s Setup
The bedroom window cracked after a laundry basket hit it during an argument, Amber says. She calls maintenance. The repair crew arrives. One works in the bedroom, the other near the living-room window. The tension rises. A neighbor hears running. Bags are packed by the door—Josh’s, Amber later confirms. He has called his dad for a pickup; his dad can’t leave work.

Then: shouting. “No, no, no.” Glass breaks. A witness sees a body falling face-first.

## IV. Arrest, Bond, And The Conditions

### Quick Arrest
Police, armed with witness statements, the shattered window, and Amber’s own words, arrest her within hours. She later bonds out and gives birth to Levi. Life begins for a child whose father has already died and whose mother is about to fight for hers.

### Slipping Compliance
On bond, she violates curfew multiple times, lets her ankle monitor die repeatedly, and fails two court-ordered drug tests for marijuana. The judge revokes bond. She returns to jail.

The case, like the apartment’s window, shows hairline cracks that will matter later.

—

## V. Inside The Courtroom: Two Narratives

### Defense: Self-Defense, Thin Glass, A Tragic Accident
Amber’s team says she pushed Josh because he grabbed her shoulders, and she was scared for herself and their unborn child. They argue the building’s glass was unsafe—thin, brittle, held with decomposing caulk—never designed for a high-rise application. The blinds were closed, the defense says; the push sent him into a compromised pane behind vertical slats; everything broke, then ended. They call an expert: a Chicago facade consultant who says the glass was subpar and the frame weathered. Amber also files a wrongful death suit against the building, seeking damages.

### Prosecution: Pattern, Momentum, Admissions, No Struggle
The state counters that no physical evidence suggests a fight near the window—candlesticks undisturbed, living-room surface relatively neat. They point to the recording: Amber never mentions a violent grab, not once. They emphasize neighbors hearing “running” shortly before the crash and suggest Amber sprinted to generate momentum against a much larger man. They introduce additional admissions, including statements fellow inmates report hearing. Toxicology reports show no drugs in Josh’s system. The state frames the packed bags as a trigger, a moment of departure that ignited anger.

They play the tape. Jurors watch Amber’s own words.

—

## VI. The Window Itself

### Design History
University Club Tower was a marvel in its time: round tower, p-shaped floorplans, computers assisting the design in the late 1960s. But the apartments’ outer glass, according to the defense’s expert, was thin, untempered, and recalked multiple times—aging caulk now brittle, frames weathered, safety standards questionable.

### The Solitary Photograph
One photo shows the blinds blown outward through the shattered window. The expert will later argue that chimney effect pressures—heat inside, wind at altitude—can pull weakened glass outward, adding suction to impact. The prosecution keeps it simpler: an unsafe window doesn’t push anyone through by itself.

—

## VII. Verdict And Sentence

### Three Hours, Twelve Jurors
After a short deliberation, the jury finds Amber guilty of second-degree murder. She is sentenced to 25 years in prison, fined, and ordered to pay funeral expenses.

Josh’s family submits statements: their loss, their fear before the fall, their view that the system worked. Amber’s family says the system failed, that law enforcement and media painted a sensational story—wealthy Tulsa family meets military tragedy—without hearing the defense’s full evidence. They vow to appeal. She does. She loses.

—

## VIII. The Expert’s Long View

### Post-Trial Technical Critique
Years after the verdict, the defense’s window consultant publishes detailed analyses: dangerously neglected window systems; extreme heat creating internal updrafts; high-altitude winds exerting outward suction; thin non-safety glass in a tower never intended to rely on such panels. The blinds blowing outward become evidence, he says, of internal pressure pushing out.

Even so, the city’s paper trail seems thin. No widely available records show formal penalties, mandated retrofits, or comprehensive post-incident evaluations specific to the building’s windows. If readers know of any, this is where public memory matters.

—

## IX. Oklahoma’s Carceral Context

### The 85% Law And Women In Prison
Amber’s 25-year sentence sits in a state with high incarceration rates and the 85% law—convicted individuals must serve the vast majority of their term. Oklahoma incarcerates nonviolent offenders at elevated levels, disproportionately impacting women and mothers in crowded facilities. It’s context, not exoneration. It’s the backdrop to a verdict already delivered.

—

## X. The Interviews And The Silent Answer

### Dr. Phil, Post-Conviction
Amber sits across from a host and says Josh grabbed her; she pushed him off; the window wasn’t supposed to fail. She’s asked why she didn’t mention self-defense in the interrogation room. She says her grandmother “knew better,” that the marriage’s context made explanation unnecessary. The tape remains what it is: a record absent any claim of self-defense at the time.

—

## XI. The Ending No One Wanted

### October 2016: A Letter, Then A Death
Amber writes to a local station agreeing to another interview. The next day, she’s found hanging in her cell. She is 25. An autopsy notes methamphetamine, amphetamine, and antidepressants. The official cause: suicide.

Her parents receive vague voicemails, struggle to reach prison staff, and ultimately learn the ruling from news. Inmates and some staff send messages and post claims suggesting foul play; the family rejects suicide as the cause, citing hope, future plans, and their belief she would not leave her son. They file a wrongful death suit against the Department of Corrections, alleging broken cameras, skipped checks, inadequate protection and mental health care, and inconsistent medication administration. The suit is dropped. The pain remains.

—

## XII. The Child In The Middle

### Levi
He was not yet born when his father died and his mother was taken into custody. He grows up with Amber’s family, away from public glare. Josh’s grandmother writes about a baby quilt she may never be able to give. A drawing appears online, attributed to Levi’s hand: a bad window, a mother gone. The pages ache more than they accuse.

—

## XIII. What The Families Said

### Two Households, One Loss
– Amber’s family: wrongfully imprisoned, manipulated, sensationalized; promised to appeal, insisted on innocence, believed key evidence never reached the jury.
– Josh’s family: a pattern of abuse documented, fear justified, justice done; a son buried, memories defended, a sentence called just.

Both families lost a child. Neither is ever the same.

—

## XIV. The Building, The Lawsuits, The Lawyer

### The Civil Side
– Amber’s wrongful death suit against building management: dismissed in 2015 for failure to serve within the required period. Her attorney later surrenders his license amid unrelated allegations of exploiting an elderly widow.
– Josh’s family sues the building and installer: seeking damages; public outcomes remain unclear. The tower persists; its glass story stays strangely quiet.

—

## XV. The Case, Boiled Down

### What’s Not Disputed
– Josh fell from the couple’s 25th-floor apartment and died on impact.
– The window failed; the glass shattered; the blinds went outward.
– Amber told her grandmother, repeatedly, “I pushed him,” before any mention of a struggle.
– A jury convicted Amber of second-degree murder after viewing her interrogation-room recording and hearing witnesses.

### What’s Contested
– Whether the push was self-defense.
– Whether the building’s window conditions materially contributed to the fatal outcome.
– Whether Oklahoma’s system weighed the case fairly against a volatile marital backdrop.
– Whether Amber’s death was properly investigated and responsibly communicated.

—

## XVI. The Pacing Of Truth

The case moves like a spiral—fast acquisition of facts, a slow tightening around admissions, a jolt from the tape, an expert’s long critique, then an ending that feels like a blackout. Readers come to stories for clarity; they stay for contradictions that look like everyday life. Two families can hold two truths. A window can be both compromised and irrelevant. A push can be cruel or reflexive. A recording can be decisive or incomplete. Courts resolve legal guilt; grief resolves nothing.

—

## XVII. Timeline (Scan-Friendly)

– 1960s: University Club Tower completed; round design, early computer-aided planning.
– May 2011: Josh files a protective order; fails to appear; order lapses.
– June 7, 2011: Argument, cracked bedroom pane, repair crew arrives; neighbors hear running; glass shatters; Josh falls 17 floors; Amber is recorded in interrogation room.
– Within hours: Arrest; later bond; birth of Levi.
– 2012: Bond revoked after violations; Amber returns to jail.
– 2013: Trial; defense argues self-defense and unsafe glass; prosecution presents tape and pattern; verdict: second-degree murder; sentence: 25 years.
– 2015: Amber’s wrongful death suit against building dismissed; her attorney surrenders license in unrelated case.
– 2016: Post-conviction interviews; October: Amber writes to TV station, then dies in prison; cause ruled suicide; family disputes; wrongful death suit filed, later dropped.

—

## XVIII. Subheads For Mobile/Social (A/B Test Set)

– “Don’t Say Anything Until Your Lawyer Arrives”—She Did
– The Round Tower, The Thin Glass, The Blinds Blown Out
– The Push Everyone Heard vs. The Struggle No One Saw
– A 25-Year Sentence Inside Oklahoma’s 85% Law
– A Letter Mailed, A Death Ruled, A Family Unanswered
– Two Families, One Case: Justice Or Tragedy?

—

## XIX. The Quiet Questions

– Would this case look different if the building’s window systems had been modernized?
– Did the interrogation-room recording eclipse context that a fuller record might have provided—or reveal a truth no later narrative could undo?
– Can two versions of the same marriage—a victim defending herself vs. an aggressor pushed—exist side by side? In families, they often do.

—

## XX. What Remains

The tower still stands. The recording still plays. A child grows up in stories that adults argue about. Somewhere in Tulsa, a round building catches the heat and wind, and inside a living room someone has likely replaced glass that shouldn’t have been there in the first place. The candlesticks are unimportant. The tape is not. The fall is over. The telling never will be.

Tap through for the case files, expert notes on high-rise window systems, and the full sequence of the interrogation-room recording that defined a verdict. The most unsettling part isn’t the fall—it’s how normal everything looked before it happened.