I received the following comment on my blog “Another Year” and it really made me think about what I’ve been writing in this blog over the years. Read on then I’ll explain.
“I am sorry you have not had many responses to your two questions (really any since Jim and Wayne only address them tangentially if at all). I am a long time reader of your blog but this is my first time commenting. I suspect many are like me – appreciate your writings concerning Stacey’s murder but are reluctant to comment since we can add little that could or would help the situation. But since you ask two questions that I can answer I thought I would reply to show you that your efforts are much appreciated.”
This contribution made me wonder if I have not been fair to readers/followers of this blog. Maybe, as the writer suggests, I’ve expected too much in the way of response from readers. I thoroughly understand the reluctance for people to comment when they feel they have little (concrete) information that would help the situation. In defense, I had hoped that applying a little pressure, however slight, might bring forth something new. There have been times when I thought it had, but the police obviously have not agreed with that.
One more time, I’ll repeat an offer originally made years ago and repeated several times since. I am willing to share any information I’ve gleaned over the years with those in authority. I’ve always felt my position in all of this was unique in several ways, and that the position could bring out information that might not come out otherwise. To me, and maybe only to me, it is clear that any information I might have is felt to be unimportant or meaningless to those in authority.
But here’s a question: Why would a cold case detective reworking the Stacey Burns murder from the bottom up not be interested in my recorded interviews with some of Stacey’s closest friends and associates?
The only answer I can come up with is that they know who committed the crime. With that said, what are they waiting for? Is it a weak prosecutor? Is it missing evidence? Is it a botched handling of evidence at the beginning? Is it simply a matter of hoping the killer finally has an awakening? Is it some law enforcement conspiracy because some of their own are involved? Is the killer so clever as to have outwitted the law for almost nine years? Is there any hope that the killer, likely known to many local people, will ever be arrested and tried?
Just some food for thought . . .