Supposedly,  a representative from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office was present at the Grand Jury hearing mentioned in a previous (but recent) blog. I know, from previous experience, that extracting information on the case of the murder of Stacey Burns from official sources is usually futile, what with the “ongoing” and “open” and “active” status of the investigation. However, would not one think, quite reasonably, that information from a hearing held on November 13, 2009 could be made public, especially if that information definitively clears a suspect in the case. This hearing took place four full years ago!

Following the same logic, would not one think, equally reasonably, that if the information from that hearing did not clear a suspect but added evidence to the case, that an arrest might have been made within four years from the time of said hearing?

Here is a personal observation based on my attempts over the last three and a half years to gather enough information for a book about the murder and I assume full responsibility for it. Here it is:

This investigation is now passive rather than active. The urgency which was obviously present at the beginning of the investigation has disappeared, replaced by sporadic attention usually given when under pressure from external sources, such as newspaper articles, family involvement, or community demand.

Please, Mr. Strelzin and police investigators, tell me that my observation is not accurate and that this murder case has not been buried under fresher cases.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!