WildHeart
Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 95
I do not agree that there is some vast conspiracy/cover-up on this crime. Why did the authorities keep publicizing the case over the years if this were true? I can't deduce a conspiracy theory over sloppy-record keeping. That's pretty common, sorry to say. For example, in SC you do not have to be a MD to be a county coroner, it's an elected position, and I've seen everything from funeral directors to ex-cops elected to those positions although I think Charleston does have both a medical examiner and a coroner. And there are a couple of expert forensic pathologists in the state, and when something is not an open and shut case, their bodies will be sent to these pathologists. But in one case I know of, the elected coroner concluded a man had died from a fire. I'm not sure why an autopsy was done-whether his family insisted or what--but his body was sent to one of the pathologists who determined the victim had died from a gunshot wound prior to the fire. My point is this: don't expect the kind of sophistication from these agencies that you would from big city agencies, either then or now. How much evidence you want to bet was lost in that investigation because it was originally investigated as a fire not a murder?
The best odds of solving this murder in my opinion rest with the gun that we KNOW committed the crime. If I were an officer looking at the case today, I'd start by interviewing his surviving friends, family members, etc. With the principles in this case probably long-dead, it's possible that family and friends might talk now where they might not have 30 years ago.
I do believe that it is possible that they are not from another country at all but were from the US. Someone with a French-accent in SC would have been remembered had they spoken to any locals--and we know they had ice cream or fruit from a road-side stand at some point on the day they died, so I'm not going to put too much stock in what the person at the KOA campground believes he remembers. I think that it is highly likely that law enforcement did go off on a goose chase or two on this case, wasting valuable time. And then new cases came along, other crimes that were solvable took precedence, the original investigators retired, etc. That's not malice, that's just a fact of what criminal investigations look like in the real world, not what you see on tv.
The best odds of solving this murder in my opinion rest with the gun that we KNOW committed the crime. If I were an officer looking at the case today, I'd start by interviewing his surviving friends, family members, etc. With the principles in this case probably long-dead, it's possible that family and friends might talk now where they might not have 30 years ago.
I do believe that it is possible that they are not from another country at all but were from the US. Someone with a French-accent in SC would have been remembered had they spoken to any locals--and we know they had ice cream or fruit from a road-side stand at some point on the day they died, so I'm not going to put too much stock in what the person at the KOA campground believes he remembers. I think that it is highly likely that law enforcement did go off on a goose chase or two on this case, wasting valuable time. And then new cases came along, other crimes that were solvable took precedence, the original investigators retired, etc. That's not malice, that's just a fact of what criminal investigations look like in the real world, not what you see on tv.