My last post briefly discussed hindsight, which is so often referred to in terms of perfect eyesight, as in 20-20 vision. My humble opinion is that the cliché is a fallacy. The further removed from an event or a conversation in time and space, the less accurate hindsight becomes. This is especially true of events and conversations that fit into the category of uncorroborated hearsay. There are many of these in Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns.

Here we are, two months shy of five years since Stacey Burns was murdered. If a conversation or an event took place on the day before she was killed and only one person other than Stacey was present, it would be impossible to corroborate it the day after she was killed, let alone five years later. Hindsight is not 20-20. Here is a paragraph from Chapter Two: A Prelude to Murder- Saturday, May 9, 2009, p. 28.

” . . .any assumptions . . .remain in the zone of uncorroborated hearsay. Stacey Burns was living her last few hours on earth. As time moved inexorably toward those horrible moments of Mothers” Day morning, one wonders if she thought back over the day, a day in which she apparently spent much of her time in frustration and confusion. The complexities of her life had to be distressing and one can only imagine what this vital, intelligent, and competent young woman might have been thinking as she retired for the night.”

As I’ve said before, looking backward in life’s rearview mirror does not always produce very clear images.