Another Repost re: The Murder of Stacey Burns
Here is a part of another post from January, 2013, about thirty months after I started working on Murder in A Small Town. It seems as pertinent today as it did then, if not more so.
“Recently, I was rereading an Ann Rule book of true crime cases (A Rage to Kill) and ran across the phrase, “Closed-Exceptional,” in her foreword. It is a phrase I did not recall but she says it designates a case in which the guilty person is known by detectives but, due to lack of physical evidence, has never been arrested. Obviously, with her outstanding record of excellent writing about true crime, Ann Rule would be aware of such terminology. I have been told (and I’ve mentioned it in other blogs) that the police know who killed Stacey Burns. Why bring this up? Here are just a few reasons.
1. If Stacey Burns murder is in a category such as Closed-Exceptional or whatever else it may be called, then it has been solved but the killer will continue to walk around free. For how long?
2. If the killer continues to walk around free, then assurances from the police that the public is not in danger are ludicrous. Any person, male or female, who could take another’s life in a manner such as happened to Stacey Burns has to be extremely unstable. Don’t tell us this is a one time event! What if the circumstances that set this homicidal sociopath off are duplicated in his or her life? Murder was a solution once; why not again? No matter what a profiler might say, it is illogical and probably even dangerous to assume that Stacey Burns’ killer is not a potential threat to others.
3. If this case is indeed “solved” but not coming to a conclusion, would the public be better served to know which of the potential persons of interest (suspects) are actually free from suspicion?”
So, here we are, five and half years later. Does this old post still apply?