Karl, I'm sorry about your great-grandfather. Were you ever able to deduce from the police reports who you thought may have been the murderer or possibly why it happened?
Sorry Marybeth, for some reason I had missed this post.
With regards to my GGF I don't think it will ever be possible to determine who was involved exactly because the Sheriff's office never properly investigated the case. This occurred in a town located directly on the border with Canada which in that area consists of a river (the boundary is the middle of the river) with several road and rail bridges spanning it. During the Prohibition the area was teeming with smugglers and bootleggers on both sides of the border and unexplained murders were not uncommon, some people taking advantage of the situation to settle a score hoping cops would blame it on the smugglers. When deputies had no leads they blamed the booze traders and handed the case over to the understaffed state police who filed it because they didn't really have the resources to pursue it.
The Coroner's report was quite short, it only stated that "the individual perished of a single bullet shot to the back of the head while he was in an automobile". Bullet was extracted but there was no autospy, back then autopsies were only performed when cause of death was not apparent. Reports don't mention the caliber but state it was from a handgun, no idea how they came to that conclusion but there must be a reason. My GGF was not robbed even though he had over $300 in his wallet, quite a sum for the day, but not unusual since sawmill owners often paid cash for their lumber.
My theory is that he was shot during an argument with someone he was doing business with, or he stumbled upon something he wasn't supposed to see. Those were very rough times on the border.
You're right about things being twisted and losing translation that are passed down through the generations. I actually don't have my hopes up THAT high about the scan, but I'm just hoping Mrs. Bryan and her daughter are there nevertheless.
Unfortunately I think this is unlikely, we don't even know when that concrete was poured. On thing that appears certain is that it wasn't on the day the victims disappeared otherwise it would have been mentioned in the original articles. If LE had good reasons to become convinced Bryan was not involved then I trust their judgment. They did poke around quite a bit after all.
They probably never met in the ER as suggested. It did sound like it was a line from either a B film or a 10 cent pulp detective magazine. And possibly the family never even held Edis Bryan in low esteem....until after the disappearance when suddenly things about Edis were brought up which may or may not have happened regarding his behavior. There had to be someone to blame, in their eyes. I agree, I don't think he was seeing anyone else when he went to Florida but met someone later and remarried.
indeed there is nothing in Bryan's behavior that appears abnormal or suspicious to me, or to those who knew him at the time. I don't know when the in-laws became hostile towards him but it could have been simply because they did not know him and stangers are always suspicious in such a situation. What I do get from the articles though is that the in-laws did not live in the area, did not visit much (except for one brother and one sister but the sister stated they weren't close) and that the community's opinion of Bryan does not match theirs. They lived in a small town where neighbors are like extended family, I think the community's opinion should prevail over that of relatives who were, after all, strangers. LB appears to have married late for the time, and it sounds like she was an independent-minded woman. Families often did not approve of this and could view any life choices such a woman would make -like selecting a husband- in a negative light regardless of actual merit. In any case neither the brother or sister who sometimes visited LB seemed to have disliked her husband or suspected him of foul play.
What I do find suspicious is the concrete (if there's any truth to it) and the fact that he seemingly left so soon after the disappearance. He may have had nothing to do with it and left because he was grief-stricken and wanted to get away from there.
Well the articles do not mention the concrete but they do mention that Bryan stayed in town for quite a while, living in a basement bachelor after subletting the house. This implies he did not own the house therefore without his family or relatives with him there was only his job tying him down there. He probably put in for a transfer after a while (I would have) and left a place that was depressing to him. I imagine he sold the houseboat since they hadn't been using it much for themselves anyway.
I just thought that the SBI must have given some credence to the concrete being laid around that time to do the scan at all.
It's not clear but this may be a privately funded venture, since states do not re-open such old cases as a rule. Good thing the current owners of the house gave permission otherwise it would have ended right then and there, no judge would issue a warrant.