Site icon Dateline Tonight

Who Is Kathryn Restelli & Where Is She Now? 2026 Update & Profile

Ryan Gill

Kathryn “Kate” Restelli became one of the central figures in a Utah murder case after admitting that she helped lure her husband, Matthew Restelli, from California to her mother’s home in American Fork, where he was shot seven times by her brother.

Her story forms a major part of the Dateline NBC Season 35 premiere “The Family Plot,” airing Friday, September 25, 2026. The two-hour episode examines Matthew’s July 2024 murder, the investigation into Kathryn and members of her family, and the trials that followed.

Kathryn did not stand trial for the killing. She pleaded guilty to reduced charges in 2025, accepted responsibility for helping set the events in motion and agreed to testify for prosecutors. She later appeared as a key witness at the separate murder trials of her brother, Kevin Ellis, and her mother, Tracey Grist.

As of September 2026, Kathryn is serving a Utah state prison sentence of six years to life. She remains in the custody of the Utah Department of Corrections, and the exact point at which she may be released will depend on decisions by the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole. A judge also ordered her to have no contact with her children.

Who Is Kathryn Restelli?

Kathryn Restelli was 37 when she was sentenced in September 2025 and 38 when she testified against her mother the following April. She was married to Matthew Restelli, a 42-year-old father who lived with his family in California before his death.

By early 2024, Kathryn later testified, her marriage was deteriorating. She was communicating with her mother, Tracey Grist, and other family members about her unhappiness and her desire to leave Matthew. Messages presented during the later trials included expressions of anger toward her husband and discussions about divorce.

Kathryn told jurors that she feared she would lose custody of her children or be unable to relocate with them to Utah if she ended the marriage through the courts. That fear became an important part of the prosecution’s account of how talk about leaving Matthew evolved into discussions about killing him.

The later criminal cases contained allegations about problems inside the Restelli marriage, including claims Kathryn made about Matthew. Those issues formed part of the background to the family conflict. They did not change the legal question that eventually confronted the courts: whether Kathryn and members of her family intentionally brought Matthew to Utah so he could be killed.

Kathryn Leaves California With the Children

In June 2024, Kathryn left the family home in California and travelled to American Fork, Utah, where her mother lived.

She took the children with her. Court and media reports have differed over whether two or three children were involved in parts of the timeline, though the prosecution presentations at the later trials referred to Kathryn and Matthew’s two young children being present in Utah when the killing occurred.

Kathryn initially presented the move as temporary. Court records later showed that she had discussed divorce and had been considering how to end the marriage.

She also placed an Apple AirTag in Matthew’s vehicle before leaving California, according to her later testimony. The device allowed members of her family to monitor his movements. That tracker would become one of the most important pieces of evidence after Matthew was killed.

How Talk About Killing Matthew Developed

Kathryn later testified that discussions about killing her husband began after she had been in Utah for about a week.

Her account was that Grist first raised the idea in a manner Kathryn initially treated as a joke: Matthew could be brought to the American Fork home, killed and the shooting could then be presented as self-defence. Kathryn said the conversations became more serious as time passed.

Kathryn acknowledged that she took part in the planning.

She testified that she feared losing her children in a divorce and that this fear influenced her decisions. She also described her mother as the person who drove the plan forward and later recruited Kathryn’s brother Kevin Ellis. Grist denied that account at her own trial.

Kathryn’s later cooperation with prosecutors made her one of the strongest sources of evidence about conversations that occurred inside the family before Matthew’s death.

Kathryn Said She Tried to Back Out

One of the central parts of Kathryn’s testimony concerned her claim that she changed her mind before the killing.

She told jurors that she began thinking about the consequences of taking another person’s life. According to her testimony, she told Grist that she no longer wanted to proceed.

Kathryn said her mother refused to stop.

At Grist’s trial in April 2026, Kathryn testified that Grist told her she did not care and intended to proceed regardless. That testimony became part of the prosecution’s argument that Grist was the driving force behind the murder plan.

The claim did not absolve Kathryn. Judge Roger Griffin later stressed that Kathryn had days in which she could have warned Matthew or contacted authorities and did not do so. She continued communicating with him as he travelled toward Utah.

The AirTag Used to Track Matthew

Kathryn admitted placing an AirTag in Matthew’s truck before she left California.

Access to the device was shared with members of her family, allowing them to follow Matthew’s location.

That evidence became significant when investigators tried to determine whether Matthew’s arrival at the American Fork house had been unexpected. It showed that his movements could be monitored before he reached the property.

The tracker also undermined the idea that Matthew had simply appeared at Grist’s home without warning.

Kathryn knew he was coming. Her family knew he was coming. Prosecutors argued that the entire point of the communications with Matthew was to make sure he completed the drive.

How Kathryn Lured Her Husband to Utah

Kathryn later admitted that she deceived Matthew about why he needed to come to Utah.

Matthew believed there remained a possibility that the couple could resolve their problems and that Kathryn and the children would return to California with him.

Kathryn maintained contact with him during the drive.

She kept him calm, gave him reason to believe reconciliation remained possible and encouraged him to complete the journey.

At the house, Matthew was told that the door would be unlocked and that he could enter.

Kathryn later admitted that this was part of the plan. By having Matthew walk through the door without someone opening it for him, his entry could later be portrayed as unauthorized.

That detail became central to the attempted self-defence narrative after he was shot.

What Happened on July 12, 2024

Matthew arrived at Grist’s American Fork home on July 12, 2024.

He had travelled hundreds of miles from California believing he was there to collect Kathryn and the children.

Kevin Ellis was inside.

Within moments of Matthew entering the house, Ellis shot him seven times.

Kathryn was upstairs with the children when the gunfire started. She later testified that she heard Matthew cry out after he was shot.

She also testified that she heard her mother and brother discussing putting a knife in Matthew’s hand.

According to Kathryn’s evidence, Ellis warned Grist to be careful because Matthew could still be alive.

The Knife and the Self-Defence Story

Ellis initially maintained that Matthew had threatened him with a knife and that the shooting was self-defence.

Investigators became suspicious of that explanation.

The knife was found associated with Matthew’s non-dominant hand, and prosecutors later presented forensic evidence supporting the theory that it had been placed there after the shooting.

Kathryn’s testimony gave investigators an explanation for why.

She told jurors that she had known before Matthew arrived that a knife could be used to stage the scene. She testified that she had seen a knife that was intended to be placed in Matthew’s hand after he was shot.

The knife became one of the strongest pieces of evidence supporting the prosecution argument that the shooting scene was planned rather than spontaneous.

Kathryn Is Arrested

The initial self-defence account did not survive the investigation.

Detectives examined the phones of those involved, the AirTag, communications before Matthew’s trip, physical evidence inside the house and the actions of family members after the shooting.

Kathryn, Grist and Ellis were eventually charged.

Kathryn faced allegations that she had not merely known about the plan but had helped create the conditions necessary for it to succeed.

Her communications with Matthew became part of that case.

So did her role in getting him to drive to Utah and enter the house.

Kathryn Decides to Plead Guilty

Kathryn eventually chose not to face a jury.

In July 2025, she pleaded guilty to murder and conspiracy to commit murder, both second-degree felonies, and felony discharge of a firearm, a first-degree felony. Charges including obstruction of justice and domestic violence in the presence of a child were dropped as part of the plea agreement.

The plea required Kathryn to cooperate with prosecutors.

That decision changed the rest of the case.

Instead of sitting beside Ellis and Grist as a co-defendant, she became a witness against them.

Kathryn could now describe conversations that investigators had previously been forced to reconstruct through phones, messages and circumstantial evidence.

Kathryn Accepts Responsibility in Court

Kathryn was sentenced on September 9, 2025.

Judge Roger Griffin imposed one-to-15-year prison terms for the second-degree murder and conspiracy convictions and a five-years-to-life term for felony discharge of a firearm. The structure of the sentences produced an overall minimum term of six years and a maximum of life imprisonment.

Kathryn addressed the court before she was sentenced.

She acknowledged that her actions caused Matthew’s death and said he did not deserve to die.

Griffin was not persuaded that her later remorse reduced the seriousness of what she had done.

He focused on the opportunities Kathryn had to prevent the killing.

Matthew spent hours driving toward Utah. Kathryn remained in communication with him during that trip.

At any point, the judge noted, she could have warned him.

The Judge Criticises Kathryn’s Actions After the Murder

Griffin also addressed Kathryn’s conduct after Matthew died.

According to evidence discussed at sentencing, a friend reported that Kathryn was preparing for a date within hours of her husband’s death.

The judge also referred to evidence that she showed friends the crime scene and responded to condolences in a manner he interpreted as showing little concern.

Those details shaped Griffin’s assessment of Kathryn when determining the sentence.

He described her children as victims of her decisions and ordered that she have no contact with them.

That order remains one of the most severe personal consequences of the case beyond imprisonment.

Matthew was dead.

Kathryn was going to prison.

Their children were left without either parent in their lives in the form they had known before July 2024.

Kathryn Testifies Against Her Brother

Kathryn returned to court in January 2026 for Kevin Ellis’s murder trial.

This time she entered the courtroom in custody and took the witness stand for the prosecution.

She explained to jurors that she was already serving a prison sentence after pleading guilty to Matthew’s murder and the conspiracy.

Kathryn described how the plan developed, how Matthew was brought to Utah and what she knew about the events inside the house.

Her credibility became one of the major issues at the trial.

Ellis’s defence had reason to emphasise that Kathryn had received a plea agreement and could benefit from cooperating.

Prosecutors argued that her testimony was supported by independent evidence including messages, the AirTag and physical evidence.

The jury found Ellis guilty of murdering Matthew.

It acquitted him of conspiracy, meaning jurors were not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Ellis joined the conspiracy in the manner alleged by the state.

Kathryn Then Testifies Against Her Mother

In April 2026, Kathryn returned to court.

This time the defendant was her mother.

She was the first witness called in Tracey Grist’s murder trial and testified while still in custody. KSL noted that her handcuffed hands became visible to the jury during her testimony.

Kathryn gave a detailed account of the development of the plot.

She described her failing marriage, her discussions with Grist, the idea of making Matthew’s death look like self-defence and the preparations before he arrived.

She also described the moment she claimed she told her mother she wanted out.

Grist denied Kathryn’s account and testified that she had not helped plan Matthew’s murder.

How Kathryn’s Credibility Was Challenged

Grist’s defence attacked Kathryn’s reliability.

Her lawyers pointed to the plea deal, Kathryn’s own criminal responsibility and her history of marijuana use.

The defence argument was that Kathryn had a strong reason to minimise her role and assign more responsibility to her mother.

That criticism mattered because Kathryn was not an independent eyewitness who had stumbled into the case.

She was an admitted participant in the crime.

Jurors therefore had to consider what parts of her testimony were supported by other evidence.

Prosecutors pointed to the AirTag data, messages, physical evidence, preparations inside the house and circumstances of Matthew’s arrival as corroboration.

The jury convicted Grist of murder, criminal conspiracy, obstruction of justice and domestic violence in the presence of a child.

Kathryn’s Mother and Brother Are Also in Prison

By mid-2026, all three members of Kathryn’s family prosecuted in Matthew’s death had received prison sentences.

Ellis was sentenced to 15 years to life for murder, along with additional consecutive sentences.

Grist received 15 years to life for murder, plus consecutive sentences for conspiracy, obstruction and domestic-violence convictions.

Kathryn’s sentence differs because she pleaded guilty to reduced charges before trial.

Her cooperation provided prosecutors with testimony used against both relatives.

That cooperation, however, did not free her from responsibility for Matthew’s death.

She remains a convicted participant in the killing.

Where Is Kathryn Restelli Now?

As of September 2026, Kathryn Restelli remains incarcerated under the authority of the Utah Department of Corrections.

The Department of Corrections maintains an offender-search system for people currently incarcerated or under state supervision. Public reporting through 2026 continues to describe Kathryn as being in prison, including coverage of her testimony at the Ellis and Grist trials.

A specific current housing unit or correctional facility is not identified in the reliable public reporting reviewed for this profile, so it would be misleading to name a particular Utah prison without a verified current inmate record.

What is clear is that Kathryn has not completed her sentence.

Her sentence is six years to life.

That does not mean she will be released after six years.

Utah uses indeterminate sentencing for offences such as these, meaning the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole will decide how long she actually remains incarcerated within the limits imposed by the judge.

When Could Kathryn Restelli Be Released?

Kathryn’s minimum sentence makes the question more complicated than adding six years to the date of sentencing.

The six-year figure represents the minimum structure created by the consecutive portions of her sentence, not a guaranteed release date.

The Utah Board of Pardons and Parole has authority to determine when, or whether, release is appropriate after the applicable requirements are met.

She could therefore remain incarcerated far beyond the minimum.

Her maximum sentence is life.

Judge Griffin made clear at sentencing that he viewed Kathryn’s conduct as grave and criticised the harm caused to her children.

Any future parole review will occur within Utah’s correctional and parole process rather than through a predetermined release date.

Can Kathryn Have Contact With Her Children?

At sentencing, Griffin entered an order barring Kathryn from contact with her children.

He told her that the children were victims of her actions and would live with the consequences of their father’s murder throughout their lives.

The order reflected the unusual position the children were left in after the killing.

Their father was dead.

Their mother had admitted helping arrange the circumstances that led to his murder.

Their maternal uncle had shot their father.

Their maternal grandmother was later convicted of helping plan the killing.

The criminal case therefore removed much of one side of the children’s immediate family at once.

Kathryn’s Present Position Is Different From the Woman Who Was First Arrested

When Kathryn was first investigated, she was one of several family members accused of participating in Matthew’s death.

By 2026, her role had changed.

She remained a convicted offender, but she had also become the prosecution’s primary insider witness.

Her testimony helped explain evidence that otherwise consisted of messages, movements, physical preparations and forensic clues.

It provided prosecutors with a narrative linking those pieces together.

That cooperation may be relevant in future parole proceedings, but it does not erase her convictions or guarantee early release.

Her guilty pleas remain part of her criminal record.

The Question of Remorse

Kathryn has said she regrets what happened.

At sentencing, she apologised for the pain she caused and acknowledged her role in Matthew’s death.

She also cried during testimony against Ellis and Grist, including while describing hearing her husband after he was shot.

Those displays formed part of the public record.

The court also heard evidence that complicated the picture of remorse.

Griffin referred to Kathryn’s behaviour after the killing and concluded that her actions at the time showed a lack of concern for Matthew and for the effect his death would have on their children.

The difference between Kathryn’s later statements and her conduct surrounding the killing remains one of the central tensions in her story.

Kathryn Restelli’s Role in “The Family Plot”

Dateline NBC’s “The Family Plot” revisits Kathryn’s transformation from Matthew’s wife to a participant in his murder and then a witness against her own family.

The case contains several elements that made it unusual: a collapsing marriage, custody fears, an AirTag hidden in a vehicle, a cross-state journey, a staged self-defence theory and three related defendants who ultimately followed different legal paths.

Kathryn sits at the centre of almost every stage.

She was Matthew’s wife.

She left California.

She tracked him.

She communicated with him.

She admitted helping persuade him to drive to Utah.

She knew he was being brought to the house where Ellis was waiting.

She later pleaded guilty.

And she became one of the witnesses who helped prosecutors convict members of her own family.

Where Kathryn Restelli’s Story Stands Today

The main criminal proceedings have ended.

Kathryn is serving her sentence.

Kevin Ellis has been convicted and sentenced.

Tracey Grist has been convicted and sentenced.

Matthew Restelli’s family is left with the consequences of a murder that began with a marital separation and ended with three members of the same family imprisoned.

Kathryn’s future now depends in part on Utah’s parole process.

Her sentence gives her the possibility of eventual release but no assurance of when that will happen.

For the foreseeable future, she remains a state prisoner, separated from the children whose lives Judge Griffin said had been permanently changed by her choices.

Dateline NBC: “The Family Plot” airs Friday, September 25, 2026, at 9 p.m. ET/8 p.m. CT on NBC.

More “The Family Plot”

More Feature Articles

Exit mobile version