A Christmas Wish

This blog has been sputtering along since the mention of a possible "new suspect" in the Stacey Burns murder case. The primary reason for this lack of momentum in the blog is really quite simple. There has been no additional information forthcoming from any of my sources.
I have been reading sections of the manuscript of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns to the Green Valley Writers Forum, a critique group of talented writers in our area of Arizona. The response of that group has been positive, with the consensus being that this book definitely should be published. However, without input from several crucial people, I feel that the story would have a bias which would effectively destroy the integrity of the book. So, I make a plea that has been made before in this blog.
My revised list of people I'd like to ask just two questions now stands at thirteen. The list could be shortened considerably if any of the NH State Police investigators would allow me to ask them the twenty six questions as I'm sure they must already have the information. Surely, they would have asked these same questions during their open and ongoing investigation which I'm certain continues even now, forty three months later.
The dilemma I am facing right now is this: Should I begin publishing what I've done so far since there truly does not seem that any resolution is imminent?
By the way, I still have that "disturbing information" that possibly could impact the murder case of Stacey Burns and would love to have NH State Police tell me that they have already dismissed it as not valid. All it would take is a return e-mail or phone call from someone in authority.
My Christmas wish? Please, New Hampshire, solve this case for the sake of Stacey and her family!
duker

Summary of New Developments

My sincere apologies go out to all followers of this blog. The usual busyness of the season somehow managed to trump my best intentions to keep you informed of any new developments in my work on the book about the Stacey Burns murder case. Since there has not been a single new development, I will summarize where this case appears to be. If anyone out there disagrees with any part of this summary, I would love to hear from you! Here are my observations and a few questions:
1. Can it be denied that this case has moved from an "ongoing investigation" to a "cold case" with all the connotations that the cold case designation carries with it? Over one month ago, I contacted the New Hampshire State Police cold case detective via e-mail saying that I had received some "disturbing   information" that may have some bearing on the murder of Stacey Burns. As mentioned in a previous blog, there was no response then and to date there has not been a response. I suppose the fault lies with me as I possibly could be more aggressive.
2. In less than five months, the fourth anniversary of the murder of Stacey Burns will be observed. As someone has said, where is the outrage that a resolution of this case has not occurred? It has been over seven months since the march in Stacey's honor supposedly applied pressure on Concord to solve this horrendous crime. I, for one, would love to hear exactly what has happened in those seven months. I've spoken with several people in Wolfeboro who had a close relationship with Stacey Burns and would seem logical candidates for a visit by cold case detectives trying to unearth new information. However, as far as I can determine, there has been only one person reinterviewed in that time. Any number of conclusions might be drawn from this if indeed my information is correct. You may draw your own but I'd surely like to hear from all of you out there with connections to Stacey Burns who have been interviewed, even in the last year.  
3. It is a cliche but a true one that with each day that passes by, the chances of bringing this psychopathic killer to justice diminish. Hopefully, the anger and frustration and disappointment of family and friends continue unabated. If these emotions should diminish even slightly, where is the hope that we will ever see Stacey's heartless killer in a courtroom?
4. This is the 67th blog since June on this topic. I honestly do not know if I am helping or hurting by trying to keep this investigation alive. While there are people who still express a willingness to support  my project, I also find some who, without saying so directly, would rather that I back off. My reasons for doing this work have been explained repeatly and I will not be "backing off" in the immediate future.
duker
      

What If and Why?

Here is what had happened in the last nine days.
Monday, November 12- Duker's Blog publishes the information from a very reliable source that there are a few people (also deemed reliable) who feel that the police should be thinking "outside the box" as far as suspects in the murder of Stacey Burns case are concerned, mentioning a specific "person of interest." I notify the current cold case detective via e-mail that I have some "disturbing information" which he may want to hear. If this information is nothing but speculative rumor, the substantial influence of the NH State Police could easily rule it out. I may be wrong but isn't this what the police are always seeking--that is, possible new information or leads, especially on a case that is three and a half years old?
Since November 12, I have had several conversations with sources in New Hampshire, all of which reinforce my opinion that this information deserves at least some official attention. That attention may simply be a contact which asks what my information is. It is possible that the information has already been examined and dismissed by the investigators but who would know if no contact takes place.
Thursday, November 15- A updating blog is published, saying that thus far, the police have not shown any interest in what it is that I am talking about.
Now, to the two questions in the title of this blog:
What if I simply called the New Hampshire State Police "tip line" and said I had information about the Stacey Burns murder? Would it take the cold case detectives nine days (and counting) to follow up that supposed tip?
What if the Stacey Burns case is moving ever deeper into the morass of paperwork which threatens to bury unsolved cases?
Why would an investigator not make a simple phone call (I left my cell phone number in the e-mail) and say,"thanks but no thanks?" Could it be that the case is solved and no more information is required, especially information that may conflict with evidence already in place?
Just trying to help . . .
duker  

Update ("New" suspect)

In Monday's blog, I mentioned hearing from a person whom I perceive to be a reliable source that perhaps the police should be taking a closer look at another possible "person of interest" in the Stacey Burns murder case. I e-mailed the New Hampshire State Police cold case detective who is currently working on the case, saying that the information given to me might be helpful but then again, it may not be. With the resources of the NH State Police, this information could be easily confirmed or denied but I do not have the influence which they have.
In an attempt to keep the followers of this blog up to date, I will tell you that so far I have not heard from the New Hampshire State Police regarding my offer to share this information. After confirming some details with this source, I will make another attempt to contact the cold case investigators.
More later .  .  .
duker

A "new" suspect

Most of the attention in the investigation into the murder of Stacey Burns has focused on just two people but today I received some rather disturbing information which I am now trying to confirm. If it turns out that this information is correct, than just maybe the police had better adjust that focus knob because those two people could move into the background.
Of course, we know that the investigators have diligently examined every possibility and have not fallen into that classic trap of identifying a suspect early on and then making sure that all the evidence points in the direction. But, what if . . .
If I can get the police to open up just a little, we either put the information mentioned above behind us or else they need to move forward on it. We will keep you informed . . .
Duker

The "Fear Factor"

The following two paragraphs will be the last of the "excerpts" which I will publish from Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns until I am ready to release everything I have already written. If anyone wants to contact me directly, my website (www.dukesouthard.com) has contact information. The suspension of the release of small parts of the book is necessary for two reasons.
First, as mentioned in an earlier blog, it is always dangerous to take anything out of its contextual surroundings as that allows the reader to speculate about what came before and what some after.
Second, to put it simply, my expectations for response haven't materialized, much as they haven't materialized for this blog since its inception in June.
Here, from page 95 in Chapter Eleven titled "The Search Begins," are two paragraphs addressing the fear factor in this story, again unedited and copyrighted.

     "In general, human nature rebels against admitting that fear exists but there can be no doubt that a high degree of anxiety is present in many of the friends that Stacey left behind. The tangible, unshakable truth that any official words or statements cannot gloss over is simple and undeniable."
     "The murderer of Stacey Burns remains free. That, in reality, means that someone who is capable of the murderous rage inherent in this heinous act is still out there, and could, as one person said in an internet blog, easily be roaming the streets of Wolfeboro. This fact perhaps colors what those closest have to say about Stacey and her life during the six months before her murder. However, the desire for justice for her and for her memory obviously overrules any hesitation they may have when expressing opinions about her. Stacey Burns was an immensely popular woman in the town of Wolfeboro. . . . .
The theme that dominates what people had to say about her can be summarized in a single sentence: Stacey Burns was beautiful, inside and out."

This Saturday, November 10, 2012, marks the end of the 42nd month since Stacey Burns was killed. More than one person had expressed the opinion to me that there will never be an arrest in this case.
Could that be possible? Each passing day seems to say so!
duker
 

Two Camps

The paragraph in today's blog is taken from Chapter Sixteen of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns, a chapter tentatively titled "Where Were You, Anybody?" The chapter addresses the mantra of motive, means, and opportunity, the three undeniable realities of a homicide investigation.
"The official investigation appeared to settle into a pattern and the amateur sleuths in the community went along with that pattern, dividing into two camps representing Jim Vittum and Ed Burns. As the blogs proliferated in numbing fashion across the internet with the main concentration circulating on the Wolfeboro Topix (sic) site, the foregone conclusion of most of the community was that police would no doubt soon be arresting one of the two. The widely accepted opinion that this investigation would be over within a short period of time allowed some leeway for Jeffrey Strelzin to proclaim that the public was not in danger. This was not a crime that would be one of many. It surely would stand by itself. All that had to happen was for the New Hampshire State Police to sift through what surely would be damning evidence and arrest the person responsible. . . . . Who had the motive? Who had the means? Who had the opportunity? How difficult could it be?"
Almost forty two months later, one can only draw a single conclusion to that final question. "How difficult could it be?" Police investigators have said on more than one occasion that they "know who did it." The conclusion has to be that the prosecution of the case is the difficult part, a conclusion that brings us full circle, back to the reasonable doubt versus probable cause dilemma.
duker   

Musing on an alibi

Here is a brief section of a chapter of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns which examines the supposed alibis of two of the "persons of interest" in the murder of Stacey Burns.

"Alibis can be everything or they can be nothing. With the investigation now in its third year, the one thing that should be certain is that alibis will not have changed from the beginning. However, what may happen could be called the erosion of an alibi. While the police wait for someone to remember something or for someone (like the killer or a friend of the killer) to finally cave in to the truth, the erosion of alibis could be occurring. . .
. . .a real danger with the erosion of alibis over time is that the initial arduous examination of them will fall victim to the same erosion. This is how people get away with murder."
(p.108-Tentative Chapter Heading- Alibis)

I'd be interested to hear if these samples from the book are piquing anyone's interest?
Duker

Social media

As promised, here is another brief sample from the unedited but copyright protected manuscript of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns. (Page 62, a chapter tentatively titled "The Exes")
"Sit in a restaurant or a bar, stand on a street corner or the post office steps, visit a local supermarket and listen to conversations or ask anyone to give an opinion on the Stacey Burns case and the 'How much truth' list would expand beyond belief. Add to those avenues for rumors the highly in-vogue possibilities of blogging, where people can literally say anything they want and express any opinion or theory, no matter how outrageous, and the blurring of truth, fiction and fantasy becomes a major problem. Inflammatory statements, frivolous accusations, astounding assumptions and presumptions, all enhanced by the power of the 'social networking' available through the internet, ricochet through the community like indiscriminate pin balls, wreaking havoc on the lives of those directly involved."

The "how much truth" list in this paragraph refers to some of the stories which circulated (and probably still are circulating) about life in the quiet and staid town of Wolfeboro. Extracting portions of a book and publishing them out of context is a dangerous thing and may not be especially productive. My purpose for doing so therefore deserves to be repeated. Here it is:
In the previous 55+ blogs on this subject, I've raised many questions, some basic and others more provocative in nature. Perhaps revealing some of what has been included in the book already will encourage participation by those who have chosen not to supply information to do so. That is my hope at this point.
duker
 

A Preview

It is October 24, 2012 and I promised in my last posting that I would resume this blog today. I will but I am resuming it without any new information since the last posting. However, I will be including brief snippets from Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns in yet another attempt to generate interest in this case. Hopefully, these short samples will direct some people with new information in my direction. As always, contact with me is not difficult through my website, this blog, twitter, Facebook, phone, e-mail, snail mail, etc. The first "snippet" is from page 103 of the unedited but copyright protected manuscript in a chapter entitled "The Investigation."

"As Sunday morning crept into afternoon, the scene of subdued pandemonium at 146 N. Main Street migrated to the police station in downtown Wolfeboro. The subdued is replaced by frenzied as friends and relatives stream into the station, searching for answers to questions they can't even formulate yet. By this time, the news has reached the extended family of Stacey Burns and her mother and siblings are on their way to Wolfeboro."

The sample creates no controversy. Future ones might.
duker  
  

Suspension and Review

This is the fifty-eighth blog in this series. There will not be another post (unless it comes as a comment from one of you out there) until Wednesday, October 24, 2012.
My posted blogs have raised issue after issue regarding the diabolical and heinous murder of Stacey Burns and the ensuing investigation into who may have committed the crime. The purpose of the blog was, I believe, clearly established early in June when it was begun.
The reason for this temporary, eleven day suspension is simple. There is not much else to say without additional factual information. Here is a brief review of what has been covered in previous blogs.
1. Questions regarding the police investigation and the apparent movement of the case closer to the "cold case" category were raised but never answered.
2. Invitations to contact me were issued to people who have chosen not to provide their side of the sometimes provocative stories and rumors running rampant around Wolfeboro. So far, those invitations have been rejected or ignored.
3. Pleas for permission to use some of the information supplied in previously conducted interviews went unanswered. (duker's note- I promised my interviewees that they would be able to read what I had written if it applied to them or statements they may have made before publishing anything. A knowledgeable newspaper person I know told me that promise was a big mistake.)
4. Requests to obtain "back story" information about the Burns and Keane families so as to paint a complete picture of this exceptional person were issued. As of this date, the information in the one hundred and forty + pages written so far is derived primarily from friends and acquaintances.
There were other topics covered as well but these were the major ones.

A friend raised a good question to me, asking exactly how this blog has been publicized so that people are aware of it. The subtext of that question is obvious: If people don't know it is available, how could I expect any results?  My answer is simple. I posted the blog information everywhere I could imagine, including my two facebook accounts, my e-mail address list, Wolfeboro Topix, the Stacey Burns memorial site, professional writers' newsletters, my website, etc. Perhaps (obviously?) that has not been enough. . .
Until Wednesday, 10/24/2012 . . .
duker  

Exactly Two Months

Exactly two months ago, on August 7, 2012, I published a blog named after a short memoir I wrote for submission to a writing contest, a contest I decided subsequently not to enter. The title of the blog was ICAC, an acronym for In Case Anyone Cares.
Toward the end of that blog, a list of names and descriptions appears. The list is quite specific, mentioning those who could help significantly with Murder in A Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns. 
With just a couple of exceptions, the people named are folks I tried to contact in conventional ways before listing them in that blog.
Well, (ICAC) I have not heard from a single person on that list since that blog was published. There are likely quite legitimate reasons for that. Here are a few but certainly not all:
     "I don't like what you are doing."
     "I don't trust you or your motives."
     "I have nothing to offer."
     "It's been over three years; I don't want to revisit such a sad time."
     "If I talk with you, I could incriminate myself ." (Never stated but I'm guessing at least one person thinks     this.)
     "It is simply too upsetting and I'd rather not deal with it."
     "The police are on top of it. The killer will soon be arrested and convicted  so why are you writing this book."

However, ICAC, I still believe in what I am trying to do.
duker
   

Proud? Believe it or not!

A few blogs ago, I mentioned that when I sent a portion of my manuscript of A Favor Returned  to Robert Newton Peck, an author I respected and had met at a conference in New Hampshire, he said, after a scathing, ego-deflating review, "write a book you can be proud of."
It has now been two full years since I traveled to New Hampshire to do the initial interviews for Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns. Since Robert Peck said that to me on more than one occasion, I've taken his advice to heart. It makes absolute sense for any writer (except perhaps James Patterson who apparently allows his name to be attached to anything these days).
If my book about the Stacey Burns murder ever makes it into print or even e-book status, I will be proud of it. Here is why:
1. I feel that I've done everything I possible could to include all sides of the story. The fact that some people have chosen to dismiss my efforts to be fair is a shame but I can deal with that.
2. The writing is good. Some who have read parts of it say that it is the best writing I've done.
3. My motive is clear and has been stated without equivocation: I will NOT profit from this book. The foundation for Stacey's children might if it ever achieves any status at all.
4. I've spent more  time, more effort and more of my own money than on any other of my writing projects. I am proud of that.
5. Just maybe, any efforts on my part have served to keep this case in the forefront for somebody, whether law enforcement, family, friends, community or even the killer.
To Rob Peck, I say this: I am proud of what I've done so far with this very difficult subject. I have no idea where it will end but hopefully Stacey's family will finally have some peace when it does end.
To those who might have something to add to this effort, please contact me. As of this moment, I am out of information. Look back through all of the blogs I've written and see the names of people who have chosen not to take part in my project. Please do not let this disappear into the abyss of the NH State Police cold case division!
duker

A Realistic Look Through Life's Rear View Mirror

While on the ten day trip, I posted just three blogs although I had great but unrealistic plans to keep to my schedule. My sincere apologies go out to those who expected more.
My "1,236 Days" blog has not yet created the response I expected. I imagined that placing the murder of Stacey Burns in concrete, time-related terms might make some people think about how long a sick, psychotic murderer has been walking around free and how long a caring, loving mother has been missing from her children. I still have hopes that the blog might accomplish this but I must admit that I'm worried that the rear view mirror syndrome is at work here.
Twenty years ago last May, we lost our son to a sudden, totally unexpected heart problem, just weeks after he had passed a pilot's physical. The relatively short book I wrote about that tragic event in our lives took over six years to write, simply because looking back was so painful. I have used the "rear view mirror" analogy often to describe the process of healing the grief associated with such a profound loss. Now, working on the Stacey Burns book, I believe I am seeing a similar pattern, a pattern that is repeated over and over again in the lives of human beings.
It is the nature of things that people want to move forward, to move beyond the hurdles, the obstacles that impede our progress. We would much prefer to see those obstacles receding in our personal rear view mirror than to have them always with us. The death of Stacey Burns presented challenges to many people, challenges that likely seemed insurmountable at the time. However, time and space thankfully place those challenges in the rear view mirror of life where they become easier to deal with each passing day. Three and a half years of life have passed by and like the eighteen wheeler we pass on the Interstate, the event takes up an ever smaller portion of the rear view mirror as we careen into the future.
Is that what we really want? Is it realistic to expect anything else as long as nothing is happening with the investigation?
duker

1,236 Days!

Please forgive the lateness of this blog which is two days late in my attempt to create a new one every other day. (Still traveling!)
For today, let us think about two words: anticipation and expectation. Anticipation of an arrest in the Stacey Burns murder case ran high in the days immediately following her senseless and needless death. In reality, the small town of Wolfeboro could only produce a limited number of suspects and surely New Hampshire State Police detectives would quickly sort out the possibilities and arrest the psychotic coward who killed her. Early on, it was not only anticipated; it was expected. Most people were not only looking forward to justice being served; they knew it would happen and soon.
Today, if my math is correct, is the 1,236th day since Stacey was killed; therefore, it is also the 1,236th day since most people began to anticipate a quick arrest in the case. Not only did they anticipate it, they fully and unequivocally expected it to happen. If I had interviewed the same people for Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns within the first week of the crime as I have in the last two years, I could guarantee that the universal expectation would have been an "imminent" arrest. Imagine a 1,236 day chart tracking the level of anticipation and expectation of family and friends of Stacey Burns as they waited for justice for Stacey. During that time, there is no doubt that there have been peaks and valleys in the chart but there certainly would be a huge gap (my opinion) in expectations between May 10, 2009 and September 27, 2012. That is a sad and truly unfortunate truth for everyone concerned.
New England Patriot fans anticipated another trip to the Super Bowl before the season began but the events of the last two games may have lowered expectations a trifle. There is no comparison between sports and what happened to Stacey Burns but the analogy seems to fit. Reality has a way of tempering anticipation and fracturing expectations.
1,236 days and counting . . .
duker

Waiting

Waiting is really fun when we are anticipating the arrival of Christmas morning or a visit from long time friends or an upcoming major sporting event. It is not fun when we are waiting for those proverbial gears of justice to grind forward "finely but painfully slow." Such is the case with the death of Stacey Burns. Three years ago, the anticipation of a possible arrest of her murderer was running high but anticipation of that level can only be sustained for a brief period of time. Now, the reality that there may never be an arrest (although the investigation is still "open/unsolved") saps the energy out of the anticipation. One reason for this blog has been mentioned previously but is worth repeating; it is hoped that it may help sustain the interest and the anticipation of a possible conclusion. I'm guessing that the rumor I heard in the beginning of June that "an arrest is imminent" is what most rumors are: baseless. That is all the more reason to keep going and keep asking questions through this blog.
So, as I asked in the last blog, is it true that according to an alleged statement by Scott Gilbert Ed Burns is not a suspect and is not being investigated? It that is true, why can't a public statement be made to that effect?
duker

Revisit

I will be traveling for a while so the next blogs will not be as regular although I will try to keep them  on the every other day schedule.
First, a follower yesterday asked if there were reasons given why some folks choose not to participate in the Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns book. If you have not read my response to that question, you might want to look at the comments on the "Two questions" blog.
As mentioned yesterday, I believe it is time to briefly revisit my purpose for beginning this blog back in early June. Actually, the blog has two purposes, not one. The primary reason is that the Stacey Burns case deserves to be kept in the forefront of people's minds. I did not know the victim but I do know many people who have been profoundly affected by this senseless and cowardly crime. I have found through personal experience how resilient human beings are in the face of unspeakable tragedy. That is a good thing. The bad thing about that resiliency is that it can lead to a strong desire to put unpleasant events into the rear view mirror of life, a mirror we can choose not to examine too closely. In June, I felt that the Stacey Burns case was being placed in the rear view mirrors of some people, authorities in particular, and that perhaps the blog could keep the attention on the case that it deserved. The secondary reason for the blog is that I wanted to explain why I undertook the book project. I believe both reasons are valid for continuing to write this blog and I will continue to do so unless those reasons lose their validity.
There has been no response yet to my question in the last blog regarding an alleged statement from Detective Scott Gilbert about the status of Ed Burns in this case. I'm sure that people are lining up to respond to that question!
duker

Just two questions!

Before getting to the subject of this blog, I have one question. Did Detective Scott Gilbert really say that Ed Burns is not a suspect, therefore is not under investigation, in the murder of Stacey Burns?
Just asking . . .If that is true, it surely seems to me that the general public might like that official information. Anyway, I digress . . .
On Saturday, I hinted at the identities of five out of the eleven people on my list who could be quite helpful in discovering the truth in the Stacey Burns murder case if they would but answer just two questions for me. I waited an extra day before this blog on the off chance that one of these people might contact me. Here is a huge surprise-not one has as of this moment.
Of the six remaining on the list, one has spoken to me at considerable length on multiple occasions and my two questions for him may only be asked after I hear from the others. Four more are family members who could provide both background material and specific information regarding the Saturday night  before Stacey was murdered. The last person I'd love to have the opportunity to ask just two questions is the gentleman who has provided the "airtight" alibi for Ed Burns. (I've already spoken with the "alibi" person for Jim Vittum so it seems only fair that I ask the same questions to the counterpart for Ed Burns.)
On another subject, it is beginning to look as though this blog is beginning to lose some momentum. In the next edition, we will revisit the original purpose of a blog about the Stacey Burns murder and the book I am writing (have pretty much written but with serious need for "fleshing out") about that horrendous crime.
Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns is in limbo without more people coming forth with additional (and new for me) information.
duker 
   

Who's on "the List?"

Since the last blog, the list of people I'd like to ask just two questions has grown from ten to eleven.
Here are the promised hints as to who may be some of the people on the list. I suppose I could come right out and mention their names but that would be too easy. If you recognize any of these possibilities, perhaps you could put in a good word for me with them and they would contact me, ready to answer their two questions.
Three of the eleven are in law enforcement. Each has been involved with the Stacey Burns in different ways but each could easily make many questions on the part of the general public disappear if they would answer my two questions. (They would have to give permission for me to use their answers, of course.)
Two of the eleven are gentlemen with whom, according to Stacey's friends, she was involved during the months preceding her death. Their answers to my questions could either prove or disprove a couple of theories about Stacey's private life, theories which have been mentioned in public before, including on the famous (or infamous) 20/20 television show.
Tune in on Monday for hints about the other six people on my list.
By the way, there can be no doubt that the investigators of this case must have asked all pertinent questions of everyone involved so there would be no reason for anyone to be reticent about answering just a couple of questions from a "true crime neophyte." Would there?
Duker

Cold case detectives + Two Questions

As the blog of 9/11/12 mentioned, I'd be interested in hearing a brief description of how cold case detectives go about their business. We certainly have seen enough in television shows and read enough in crime stories but it might be good to hear it from the real world. How do detectives who have been handed the "murder book" from an unsolved case proceed to develop new leads, new information, even new suspects? Of course, we all know that the Stacey Burns case is not considered a cold case by the New Hampshire State Police, even though Scott Gilbert of the cold case division is now the lead detective trying to solve it. Perhaps someone out there could guide us through a day in the life of a detective who has the Stacey Burns file on his/her desk. Naturally, this  detective no doubt has at least a few other files on his desk as it has now been forty months and a few days since Stacey was murdered in her own home!
Now, in the last blog, I mentioned that I would love to have the chance to ask certain people two questions. Clearly, it would be wonderful to be able to ask more but rather than be greedy, I'd settle for just two. My list of those "certain" people is really not that long and it even includes a couple who have already given me interviews. Right now, the list consists of ten people. That means this could be a game of "Twenty Questions," two for each one.
Can you guess who might be on my list? More importantly, if you think you know someone who may be on the list, could you convince them to answer my two questions?
Hints for who may or may not be included on this list will appear in the next blog, two days from now.
Duker

Credibility (Continued)

The last blog asked a question about who may have the most credibility in the Stacey Burns case and listed many possibilities. Today, let us think about the question from the opposite perspective. Look at the list from the last blog and think about which person or group are you least likely to believe is telling the truth? This little exercise should be relatively easy but can be productive as well.
In my usual naive and unrealistic state of mind, I often think it would be a fascinating study to get everyone connected to the Stacey Burns murder (police investigators, lawyers, family and friends, writers and even the "suspects") in a single room at the same time to tell their stories in front of each other? Then, I get to ask each person just two questions which they must answer, again with everyone present. Obviously, that will never happen but it is still interesting to contemplate. It would certainly help all of us to figure out who has the most and the least credibility.
The next blog asks the simple question: What exactly do cold case detectives do in their attempt to bring forth new information?

What is the truth?

I have no idea what the truth is as far as it relates to the murder of Stacey Burns. I absolutely know what I want to believe is the truth. I absolutely know that what people have told me is the truth. I absolutely know that all that I have been told cannot be the truth. So, the cliched "bottom line" is this: Which source has the highest credibility?
Is it the police who have told me that they "know who did it?"
Is it Stacey's friends who have told me that they "know who did it?"
Is it Ed Burns who has the "air-tight alibi" but whose track record for the truth is suspect at best and doubtful at least and whose motive might place him at the top of someone's list?
Is it Jim Vittum, who told the police right from the start that "you've got to look at me" and, per his request, they have been and, in the police view, rightfully so?
Is it some of the blog writers such as appear on Wolfeboro Topix with their versions of the truth?
Is it the NH State Police Cold Case Division who are now working on the case after three years and are dedicated to finding the murderer as folders of new cases multiply on their desks?
Is it Stacey's heartbroken family who simply want the killer caught and her death avenged in some way?
Is it the erstwhile writer who thought this project would be easy compared to writing fiction? Fact are facts, right? How hard could it be to write a true story?
More on credibility on the next blog- In the meantime, if you are interested in this case, ask yourself where you might find the highest level of credibility.
Duker
 

My Challenge

While thinking about my progress with Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns, I'm sensing that it may now be inching its way toward being "ongoing" in much the same way as the police describe their investigation of the murder of Stacey Burns. My writing time now is spent on background material, fleshing out parts of the narrative already in existence while the final two chapters ( Arrest and Trial/Conviction) await what I hope will be a conclusion soon.
My challenge now is to have the book in its best form possible so that when the inevitable arrest does occur, the book will be only two chapters from completion. With this challenge to me comes an equally important challenge to those people out there who have chosen not to participate in this book yet who have valuable information that deserves to be included. I will admit that there are holes, including some substantial ones, in what I have written so far. For example, I know what a special person Stacey was to her family but that information has come to me through her friends. I know what her marriage to Ed Burns appears to have been like, but that information comes to me through her friends, not from a "primary" source. I know how devastating it is to lose an adult child from first hand experience and my daughters know how devastating it is to lose an adult sibling but this project isn't about our loss; it is about the loss of Stacey Burns and the enormous hole she left behind in the lives of so many people. I cannot begin to speculate how other people feel and that is a weakness in this book as I try to tell Stacey's story. The depth of loss is palpable in those who have spoken to me and I've tried to convey that depth in the book.
"Write a book you can be proud of," Robert Newton Peck once told me. With the Stacey Burns book, I could only say to him that I'm doing the best I can.
Duker

Eddie Being Eddie?

I have received the dispatch logs of the October 26, 2009 "incident"  and for what it is worth to those reading this blog, here are my conclusions based on what I am seeing. Again, if you have a different version, I'm sure everyone would love to hear it and this is a good forum for it.
Conclusion # 1- Ed Burns' mother had been in the house that morning but left after informing a neighbor (unnamed) that she was going back to Winchester because she was tired of Ed's drinking. She was not there for the response after the initial call came into the Wolfeboro Police Department. (It apparently was not a 911 call)
Conclusion # 2- As a first priority, the police made certain that all five of the Burns children were accounted for before they decided what action to take at the house. Four of the children were in school and the fifth had been picked up by a friend of Stacey's.
Conclusion # 3- From my "true crime neophyte" perspective, it seems from the log that the response was organized and systematic, including closing roads and taking other precautions for the safety of the general public.
Conclusion # 4- In the many interviews I have conducted while working on Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns, a fairly clear picture of Ed Burns has emerged. Because he and others have chosen not to tell me their side of some of the stories I've heard, I can only conclude that the behavior of Ed Burns on October 26, 2009 was not unusual for him and that his behavior that day precipitated the entire episode.
There is more information in the dispatch log which will almost certainly show up as background in the book as long as I am sure that it is in the public domain.
My thanks to the Wolfeboro PD for supplying the dispatch log to me.
Duker

No Criminal Conduct Occurred

I'm releasing this blog a day early (from my every other day schedule) because interest seems to be there to hear about this subject.
Here is the reason I said in yesterday's blog that the October 26, 2009 event at the home of the Burns family appears to have no connection to the investigation of the murder of Stacey Burns.
I have been told that I will be receiving dispatch logs regarding the 146 North Main Street call on October 26, 2009. However, "there are no officer, incident or investigative reports as the responding personnel determined that no criminal conduct had occurred on that date."
Could it be stated much clearer than that? Does anyone out there have a different viewpoint? I have made some inquiries but until I hear from someone with specific knowledge that something different happened that day, I have no choice but to take the word of the authorities who dealt with the situation. Apparently, my idea to use this as backstory in the book is not going to happen.
In addition, archival records for telephone calls, radio transmissions or transcriptions do not go back that far so they are also unavailable.
Duker  

October 26, 2009- Incident explained

Well, my blog readers, you have no doubt heard the expression, "according to informed sources."
These informed sources are usually at the center of a story and are privy to information that others are not. Now, according my best informed sources, the alleged incident at the home of Stacey Burns on October 26, 2009 has no bearing at all on the murder case of Stacey Burns.
Here is a portion of my explanation to authorities after I asked for information on this incident. "I am trying very hard to gather factual information for background material for my book rather than simply information supplied by individuals . . ." It may be added that similar to my discussion of what constitutes the truth being different for different people, some people may be more credible than others. This is not to say that people do not tell the truth: on the contrary, I tend to think that most people are honest. The truth does not vary; only the perceptions of the truth vary.
It is truly amazing to me how difficult it is to come by truly accurate information as time goes by. It really goes back to primary versus secondary sources. Even a person who observes an event first hand and is a credible, believable witness, therefore a primary source, may become a secondary source, much less credible, three years after the fact as other variables intrude on his or her perception.
So, my opinion, for what it is worth, is to suggest that for now the October 26, 2009 event at the Burns' house on North Main Street be removed from the discussions of the murder of Stacey Burns.
If you differ, I encourage you to let me know!
Duker

Progress? Maybe but maybe not

If what I've heard so far from my requests for information on the incident of October 26, 2009 at the home of Stacey Burns is accurate, is appears that the incident is being treated as a separate and unique event, not necessarily as part of the murder investigation. Again this is how it seems but that perception on my part may be incorrect. Stayed tuned as I wait for an official response from the N.H. Attorney General's office.
If you've been following this blog, you are aware of some of the frustrations a writer encounters when dealing with the true crime genre versus the fiction genre. I can't create a plot- the murder of Stacey Burns has already done that for me. I can't develop fascinating characters- the characters in this story are already developed. I can't create a setting for the story- the time and place are already well established. I can't write revealing dialogue- what people say has to be exactly what they said.
Here is my mantra when writing this true crime book: IF IT MADE UP, IT IS FICTION! That includes plot, setting, characterization and dialogue.
It is, after all, TRUE crime.
Duker

Attorney General-Request for Info

As suggested by Chief Stuart Chase of the Wolfeboro Police Department, I submitted an official request for incident/police reports and transcripts of 911 tapes that relate to the "incident" of October 26, 2009 at the home of Stacey Burns on N. Main Street to Mr. Jeff Strelzin, prosecutor for the New Hampshire Attorney General's office. I've already been informed that no information about the actual day of the murder is available due the status of the investigation. In my quest for more "backstory" (see other blogs for explanation if needed) I thought that the reports of the incident on October 26 would provide additional insight to include in the book.
I'm interested to know why I was referred to Mr. Strelzin if this incident is unique and separate from the murder investigation. If it is part of the murder investigation, I'm sure my request will be turned down. I'll keep you informed through this blog.
As always, my offer to include other documented information in Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns stands if anyone out there wants to provide it.
Duker

Incident on North Main- related? unrelated?

A search of the archives of many New Hampshire newspapers would reveal that an "incident" took place on North Main Street in Wolfeboro on October 26, 2009 at the home of murder victim Stacey Burns. As mentioned in previous blogs, I requested official information about that incident from local and state authorities. My belief was that the incident was separate from the Stacey Burns murder investigation but that it would help with the background for Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns. Thus far, I have only heard from the local police department informing me that my request should go to Mr. Jeff Strelzin, Head of the Homicide Division, New Hampshire Attorney General's Office. I have not yet heard from the N.H. State Police.
I confess to being a little confused and it probably is just my ignorance of how these things work but perhaps someone out there can enlighten me.
If this incident is unrelated to the murder investigation, why can't the information about it be released? If there is a stronger relationship to the murder investigation other than the fact that it occurred in the same house, then I can understand the reluctance to release any information about it.
Once again, the lack of information coming from those in authority only leads to speculation, which is exactly what I am doing here- speculating. I suppose there is good reason to keep everything having to do with this case so secret but more than three years into it, one would think that making some things public might help shake loose some new information.
Again, forgive my naivete in asking for information I thought should be available- just showing ignorance again, I guess.
Duker

Losing interest?

It has been one thousand, one hundred and ninety-seven days since Stacey Burns was brutally attacked and murdered in her own home. That represents untold hours of sleepless nights, stress-filled days and crushing sadness for her family, friends and even acquaintances. Is it any wonder that recently I've heard the following sentiments expressed in different ways but basically the idea is the same?
"I want this to be over."
"I want this to have closure."
"I want this to be solved."
Even, in desperation, "I want this to go away."
My concern and one which I hope is not rooted in truth is that time is the enemy of justice. The search should not falter in the face of the reality of time and space. The energy of the "march for Stacey Burns" on May 10, 2012 needs to be always be replenished because time erodes energy, no matter how hard we try to sustain it. Certainly everyone would be relieved if the killer is found but the reality is that the urgency of three years ago has lost SOME of its momentum for SOME people.
The success of the attempt to keep the urgency alive through Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns depends on people talking to me so that I can tell the story accurately. For example, an entire chapter of the book is devoted to the alibis of each of the "persons of interest" but my information is based on second hand knowledge in one case in particular because the people involved will not speak with me. I repeat something I said in an earlier blog. If you want your story told, contact me and I'll be happy to include it.
I saw this quote somewhere and regret I can't come up with the original source but it is worth considering.
"The truth is rarely pure and never simple." What a great quotation but one that I believe is completely wrong. The truth is pure and it is simple. There is one person out there who knows the truth of what happened to Stacey Burns. That is the truth and it is pure and it is simple.
Duker

Commenting on a blog

I must apologize to those of you who have tried to comment on duker's blog. I did not know (until Joanne pointed it out) that you need to "join" the blog to comment. That explains why so many people have been reading it but there have been few comments! I am working on a solution but in the meantime,  if you want to comment on any of the blogs but do not want to become a "member" just send me an e-mail at dukesout@dukesouthard.com and I will repost it on the blog.
Again, apologies to those who might have been trying to say something!
Duker

Update-Freedom of Info request

I wanted to keep everyone updated on my request for information about the incident on N. Main Street on October 26, 2009.
According to the tracking information supplied by the USPS, an "attempt" to deliver was made in both cases with notices left that the certified letters sent to the Wolfeboro Chief of Police and the Commander of Troop E, N.H. State Police  had arrived. I assume that they should be in the respective person's possession by Monday at the latest. My record sending certified letters is not good. As mentioned in a previous blog, the one I sent with a simple question to John Quinones of 20/20 fame was signed for but not answered. The one I sent to Ed Burns was never picked up and was eventually returned to me unopened.
If either of these outcomes happens with these two letters, I will not be happy as I believe that common courtesy would demand a response of some sort.
Some people who have just started reading this blog may not know that it has been ongoing for over a month. If you cannot get the beginning blogs, you may have to look at "older posts."
On Monday, I will once again explain why interviews with certain people would be so helpful with presenting an accurate picture of this terrible tragedy.
Duker

Key clubs? Drugs? In Wolfeboro?

Today, just two brief items in the blog . . .
First, I have sent via certified letter a request for police reports and 911 transcripts regarding the incident at the Burns'  home on North Main Street on October 26, 2009. These, if they release them and there is no reason that I can see not to release them, will provide additional background into the characters who people this story.
Second, I must mention that I have now heard from enough sources that the questions have to be raised: Is there another side to the idyllic, quiet town of Wolfeboro? Is the "key club" myth or truth? Is there a sophisticated drug culture that exists in the town, not simply juveniles fooling around with pot but something far more serious? I do not know the answers to these questions but since they have been asked of me in connection with my book about Stacey Burns, maybe someone out there can enlighten me? I'd love to bury these troubling rumors but need some help doing so.
Anyone care to respond? Duker

Backstory- October 26, 2009

The status of the Stacey Burns murder investigation remains "ongoing" so I do not hold out much hope as I file a Public Records Act request for incident, police and criminal reports and 911 tape contents. However, in my efforts to obtain more "backstory" information, I will be requesting through the same avenue any police reports on the incident at the Burns's home on October 26, 2009.
As a writer/journalist/researcher working on a legitimate project, I would think that this information should be made available to me upon request as long as I fund any expenses involved in duplicating documents, tapes and any other pertinent information. If the information about that incident has no bearing on my narrative about the Stacey Burns case, I obviously would not use it as it would be out of place. Time will tell if this effort to obtain the information is successful.
Meanwhile, there are many other documents that I believe could be quite revealing, again as background material for my project. Unfortunately, these remain unavailable but imagine how helpful it would be to peruse personal letters, court orders, restraining orders, stalking claims, court testimony from Stacey herself, entire 20/20 interviews instead of snippets! The list could go on and on. This crime did not occur in a vacuum but I'm certain the detectives have explored all of these possible options and no doubt continue to do so in "ongoing" fashion.
Duker

Backstory- Friends of Stacey Burns

The last blog outlined briefly what the literary term "backstory" means in both fiction and nonfiction writing today. The blog also discussed how great it would be to have Ed Burns and his family provide background information for many of the already written chapters in Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns. Of course, it has only been two days so the fact that I haven't heard from anyone about supplying more of the backstory before Stacey was killed doesn't necessarily mean that I won't. However, I am having the feeling that I just might not hear anything so today I'm asking that any of Stacey's friends, including those who have already interviewed with me, who might want to add anything to what they may have already said. to do so.
In a book of this nature, there can never be too much information provided. The backstory drives the narrative with insights into important aspects of character, motivation and personalities of those most directly involved in the story.
Again, I would love to hear from anyone with anything they believe may add substance to the telling of this continuing tragedy.
I still await permission from several interviewees to publicize the information they have provided. When and if that happens, I'll be able to proceed with the plan to begin releasing the book a chapter at a time, even in the face of some experienced writers who think that is not a good idea.
So . . . Ed Burns and his mother and sisters and friends of Stacey's, I anxiously await anything you might have for my backstory!
Duker

Backstory-Ed Burns

Attend any writers' conference or seminar or forum or workshop or class and you are sure to hear about the literary device known as backstory. Murder on a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns has a substantial amount of backstory but, in the author's opinion, needs more.
Backstory is that device that expands the reader's knowledge of background information, filling in the narrative using such techniques as flashback, character recollections and even dialogue. In the case of this book, I could supply a list of those people who have already supplied much of the backstory and the reaction on the part of those reading this would likely be to question why I do not have other "backstories" from other people close to the Stacey Burns case. That is a valid question but it has a simple answer. I want to include as much backstory as I can but I can't do it if people either will not talk to me or, for those who have spoken with me, don't want me to include what they have told me.  
In the title of this blog, I mention Ed Burns, Surely, he would have some timely and pertinent information for me to include as backstory, especially if he was aware of what others have said about him. I would love to include as background the incident that occurred at the Burns' house in October of 2009, just five months after Stacey was murdered along with the police reports of that incident. Ed Burns and his family could supply their version of events already part of the book  and that would surely make for fascinating and illuminating backstory.
So, as I said on previous occasions, I may be in Arizona but Im not hiding out. I am readily available by e-mail, Facebook, phone or letter if anyone out there wants to be part of the "backstory" for this awful crime. There are still many pages to be filled as we wait for "ongoing investigation" to be completed and an arrest to be made.
Duker

ICAC (in case anyone cares!)

ICAC (In Case Anyone Cares) is the title of a short personal memoir I wrote for submission to a writing contest last year. (I did not submit it.)
Well,  ICAC, I continue to write this blog every two days or so SOLELY for the purpose of keeping the murder of Stacey Burns in the public eye and, judging from the statistics of how many people are viewing the blog, it appears that "a degree" of interest remains. I have received a number of comments from people I hold in high regard  that indicate to me that I must be showing too much frustration in the blog. Probably nothing will turn readers off faster than a whiny, complaining tone and if that has been the case here, I apologize. However, ICAC, there have been frustrations in trying to write a fair, unbiased, impartial, truthful, complete yet interesting account of the events leading up to and the investigation following the utterly horrible crime against Stacey Burns. (Wow- seven adjectives in the same sentence- shame on me!)
For today's blog (ICAC) I'll mention just one of those frustrations but it is a major one.
     Gathering critical information has been impossible so far. I can't be fair, impartial, etc. etc. without hearing from the Keane family, from Ed Burns, from Ed Burns' family, from Eric Thor (directly), from the NH State Police, from local authorities, from interviewees who would give me permission to publish their information, from friends of Stacey Burns who could help form a complete picture of who she was. Hearsay, rumor, innuendo, and opinion are all interesting and certainly have a place in the book but they cannot take the place of facts.
ICAC, future blogs will concentrate of the facts and sources I need to "flesh out" the true story of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns.
Duker

"Conflicted" Evidence

Sorry this blog is about 8 hours past due on my every other day schedule!
What is "conflicted evidence?" How does this term relate to the Stacey Burns murder case?
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to chat with a prosecutor for the State of  Arizona based in Phoenix, a city in which over two thousand people pass through the court system every day. He understands why the police investigators are so close-mouthed about the Stacey Burns murder. It is NEVER good to lose a case because it may mean that a guilty person walks free. Therefore, until prosecutors are thoroughly convinced that they have a strong case, they are wary of bringing a case to court. However, it does not have to be the (I don't like to use this phrase-too old and tired- the phrase, not me) slam-dunk case that the prosecution in New Hampshire is apparently searching for with the Stacey Burns case. Sometimes, it is worth the chance of a hung jury or a mistrial to try to nail a murderer. Conflicted evidence is likely at least one of the reasons that an arrest has not yet been made in the Stacey Burns case. What this means is that evidence which needs to point toward the alleged perpetrator instead points in a different direction, thereby diluting the "beyond a reasonable doubt" possibility, a situation a sharp defense lawyer could easily expose.
Of course, we don't know if the conflicting evidence is physical, i.e. missing a murder weapon or some other direct link to the crime or if it is a lab problem like unexplained DNA samples or finger prints, etc. What we do know is that there is a definite missing link in the case but what that is may never come to light unless the case is taken to the Grand Jury based on probable cause evidence and an arrest is made through that avenue. The question is whether or not it is worth the chance to make an arrest with only an eighty to eighty five percent chance of conviction rather than wait, perhaps a long time, until the prosecution has its (here's that phrase again!) slam-dunk case.
I'd love to hear some reaction to these blogs, either here or on Facebook as Duke Southard, Author or just plain Duke Southard.
Also, look for some changes in the section of Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns which has been published on my website. Those changes may not take effect until later today or tomorrow morning.
Duker    

Needed: Suggestions (badly needed)

Here are several areas where I need some suggestions as to how to proceed with the Stacey Burns book:
1. What should I do about those who really seem to wish this whole thing would go away yet are present in my first, second, third etc. drafts of the book?
2. What should I do about conflicting interviews wherein people tell me one thing or another is true while others tell me that there is no way anything that was said could possibly be true?
3. What should I do about the "authorities" (which I put in quotes because it seems to me that the description as authorities is an oxymoron) who would not respond to my offer to share what I've discovered just in case it may contain something new for them? I am talking about letters, e-mails, and phone calls. Call the hot tip phone line? If what has happened to me is indicative, then forget about calling about this case.
4. What should I do about people like Ed Burns or Michael Brabant or Eric Thor or Marc Fitzpatrick or Jim Vittum or ANYONE else who may know a detail or a minor event that may mean everything to the case?
I am getting the feeling (I desperately hope I am wrong) that the blog or my writing a book or just my asking questions is not accomplishing the result for which I had hoped.
Am I kidding myself? Is trying to keep this case alive like trying to swim against a vicious rip current?
Anyone care to offer suggestions?
Duker

An Open Letter to Wolfeboro, continued

Jonathan Swift's "modest proposal" of 1729 was intended to solve two problems in Ireland at that time. In brilliant satirical fashion, he proposed that the hunger problem and the "poor people" problems could be solved by the poor people fattening up their children and selling them to rich ladies and gentlemen, solving both the food shortage and the poor people issues at the same time.
My modest proposal of Sunday's blog has about as much chance of becoming a reality as his outrageous proposal did almost three hundred years ago. However, his satire called attention to issues of the day just as I had hoped this blog might keep attention focused on the investigation of Stacey Burns' murder.
First of all, getting people of like minds together is difficult enough, no matter what the cause.
Second, getting them together in the existing atmosphere surrounding the crime, even three years plus later would be nearly impossible.
So, Wolfeboro citizens, take my proposal in the same vein as Swift's contemporaries probably took his; that is, some of them were moved to try to change things, to make a difference while others decided there was nothing they could do anyway so why even try?
But . . .just to see the reactions of the authorities, maybe it would be fun to try!
(For those who do not understand this blog, please go to Sunday's blog for clarification.)
Duker

An Open Letter to Wolfeboro, N.H. Re; Stacey Burns

Dear Wolfeboro Citizenry:
Here is a crazy idea, right up there with the "Modest Proposal" of Jonathan Swift. (Oh, if only I could be as great a satirist as he was!)
While gathering information for Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns, I have found that virtually anyone I interviewed or anyone I heard about or anyone remotely interested in the case has an opinion about who killed Stacey Burns. Since the police could not possibly have interviewed (or interrogated) all of these people, I have a modest proposal of my own.
Why not have everyone, and I mean everyone, who believes that Ed Burns killed Stacey meet at a certain time and place and compare all their reasons for that belief? That group could appoint a secretary who could compile everyone's opinions along with facts which they certainly would have and then they could present their unbiased information to the cold case detectives in Concord.
This same process could be used for those who believe that Jim Vittum was responsible for Stacey's death.
It could also be used for those who believe that it was a third person of interest or a fourth or a fifth.
The result of this effort would surely place the New Hampshire State Police in the enviable position of having citizens directly involved in helping to solve this crime. All the detectives would have to do would be to sort out which group has the most compelling evidence. 
As mentioned in a previous blog, I've heard many times the exclamation that "I know who did it!" This plan would present a perfect opportunity to tell people of like mind exactly how you know that.   
Duker
  

Police refused requests

Since beginning the research on Murder in a Small Town:  The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns, requests for information from the police have been rejected at every turn because of the "ongoing" investigation. Recently,  a newspaper editor told me to look for a First Amendment Coalition and I actually found one in the Boston area. I have heard they may be able to help me find a legal way of obtaining some of the police reports and I am hoping this is the case.
The book is now at a point where I need additional help to complete it (as far as I can go with it without an arrest) In Arizona, as I understand it, if a reporter or writer requests information but then is told that the investigation is ongoing, that person can ask how supplying that specific information would damage or compromise the investigation. I'm wondering if the same is true in New Hampshire? I hope to find that out and also will be making an official request in writing for some of the pertinent police reports, a request which is certain to be turned down..
The book is sixteen chapters, 43,000+ words and about 140+ pages long and now needs the fleshing out that the police reports and a few crucial people could supply. Of course, as mentioned, the conclusion remains out there somewhere.
I will be curious if the question about how my seeing those reports could jeopardize the investigation will be answered. Anyone out there who has a handle on freedom of the press?
Duker

Arrest imminent? (Or next year!)

Hearsay, rumor and yes, even blatant gossip are indeed dangerous weapons in the arsenal of human folly.
Here are just a few of the thoughts I've heard expressed concerning the Stacey Burns case. Some are new but a few may be repeats of past postings. (Quotation marks are mine, used only to highlight the content..)
     "An arrest is imminent." Imminent by definition means impending, likely to happen without delay. Unfortunately, I first heard this about two years ago.
     "This case will never get to trial-there are important people who do not want the publicity from a trial." So, the NH State Police have spent who knows how much money and effort on this case already only to have it squelched? I would guess probably not ( and would desperately hope this is not the case)
     "There really is only one suspect in this case." We get to take our pick of whom we would place into this category.
     "The public is in no danger." The prosecutor from the Attorney General's office announced this so it must be true and everyone can relax. (Guess what? There are people who remain concerned, worried and probably afraid despite this calming reassurance.)
     "There is a dark side to the quiet, friendly and bucolic town of Wolfeboro and this case proves it." All this case proves is that there is one very sick individual who remains free to live his/her life. Perhaps a trial might expose the "dark side" but that remains to be seen. Luckily, "an arrest is imminent."
     "The police know without a doubt who did it." This is the old probable cause versus beyond a reasonable doubt dilemma. More likely, the police know without a doubt that they think they know who did it. As the old cliche goes, "show me the money" or, in this case, show me the killer.
I'll stop here but I sure would like to hear more of the facts which are out there but I'd settle for a few more of those much  more interesting rumors.
Duker
         
  

Removed by time and space

This will be brief but also in "sad but true" realm.
A short talk with a publisher representative provided a harsh reality check a while back as did the horrible event in Aurora. Colorado a few days ago.
The publisher's rep reminded me that the murder of Stacey Burns, as  enormously important it is to that first close circle of family and friends, actually loses its momentum as the story moves outward in distance and time. The general population of Boston is not nearly as attuned to the story as people in Wolfeboro or even all of New Hampshire. In our Tucson paper several days ago, right before the attack in Aurora, there were stories about three murders in one day! Now we have dozens killed or maimed just because they happened to go to a movie!
This is just another reason why I want to keep the Stacey Burns case stirred up. Otherwise, it faces the possibility of  fading away under the numbing onslaught of other daily atrocities that are not separated by time and distance but are in our face over and over again.
Every case is important to someone.
Duker       

Explanation of Sad but True

My sad but true blog of Wednesday generated some interesting comments although just a couple on the blog itself.
I did not intend to give the impression at all that Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns is no longer a project of mine. Actually, my wife has said that it sometimes seems to be consuming me.  The reasons for writing this book have been outlined in previous blogs and those reasons have not disappeared. What I would like most to do right now is to begin releasing the book chapter by chapter as an e-book and perhaps by the time Chapter Seventeen is released, there will be a conclusion. (arrest/trial/conviction) However, I cannot do that because I do not have either release forms or other written permission to use some of the information contained in the chapters already completed.
I did not want to appear to be a whiner but the fact is that information appearing in print is a whole lot more intimidating than information contained in the spoken word. Yes, people are nervous but I also believe that in my effort to keep this case alive, I keep reawakening the grief, the devastation and the heartbreak of Stacey's death.
Perhaps this would all be much easier if an arrest were made. At least then family and friends of Stacey Burns might see possible closure and feel that just maybe they could move on. By the way, two years ago and eighteen years after our son's death, I wrote an award winning essay: the title? "The Fallacy of Closure"  The theme was quite simple. Many people do not want closure because that word implies that we are ready to forget, to draw a curtain across the past. I closed that essay with this sentence: "Love will trump closure every time."
Justice for Stacey Burns simply has to happen. Forget about closure and think about love.

Sad but true . . .

After thousands and thousands of words, untold hours and expense, I have to say that I don't know where Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns is going to end up.
I promised all those whom I interviewed that they would have a chance to approve what I had written that pertained to them. Obviously what I've written had made some folks nervous (and rightfully so, I guess) so my plan to release this book in serial fashion in e-book format by chapter is not happening at this point.
This is NOT to say that the book will not be finished. It will be and virtually is; however, it will not see the public domain until I have those permissions. (Lawsuits, no matter how frivolous, are a reality in today's society.)
When there is an arrest, this book will be ready to go, if not before. In the  meantime, if anyone out there wants to have input, now is the time. (Mr. Burns, Mr. Thor, Mr. Brabant, any police or investigators, any family members, anyone . . ) I am not exactly in hiding. Check website, blog, or just the white pages for Green Valley, Arizona.
Duker  

Open/unsolved or cold case

Today, let us do some hypothesizing about when a murder case moves from open/unsolved to cold case.
It is now three years and sixty-two days since that horrible day when Stacey Burns was killed. Ample time has passed for a valid discussion of what constitutes a "cold case" to be held.
There are some police detectives who would argue that a case never goes cold; rather, it remains in the open/unsolved category. I truly don't know if this is true or not since the New Hampshire State Police do, in fact, have a cold case division and it apparently is active in this case as detectives from that division have interviewed at least one person in Wolfeboro of whom I am aware. There may or may not have been  others.
Speaking in generalities, suppose a detective from a cold case division of a police department interviews someone more than three years after a crime has been committed. Does that mean that case has turned cold? Does it mean that other detectives who are not in the cold case division have stopped working on the case?
Do more recent cases with more current leads receive all of the attention of the detectives handling active cases and a case like Stacey Burns' keeps moving further down the list?
A police officer explained to me once that a cold case means there is simply nothing more the police can do in the present climate of information. Hmmm . . .
Just as in the last blog where I wondered when the killer finally will say to himself/herself, "I got away with murder," I wonder again when the authorities will say in reference to Stacey Burns, "this case is cold" or,  perhaps more troublesome, have they already said it?
Just wondering . . .
Duker  

Murder, politics and dead ends

Recently, I had a conversation with a friend here in Arizona about the Stacey Burns murder case and my book. He happens to have extensive experience at the state level in a major crime unit in the Midwest (NOT IN N.H.) We touched on many different aspects of this sad story but three areas struck me as important-not necessarily new but important reminders as we enter the fourth year of the investigation.
1. Knowing only what I could tell him about the murder, he immediately said that whoever killed Stacey Burns must have really hated her. As Brad Garrett said in his 20/20 interview, this was "overkill." Maybe this is obvious to all but the savagery goes beyond simply killing someone.
2. Prosecutors have to be extremely careful. Much has been made of the double jeopardy issue and certainly no one wants to have a killer walk free because of a weakness in the case. Realistically, no prosecutor wants the political fallout from losing a case either. As my friend pointed out, any elected or even appointed official must be acutely aware of the power that placed them in office and they would not want to jeopardize that power base by losing what would surely be a high profile case. The political smart thing to do in the Stacey Burns case is wait and hope that something additional happens. Probable cause does not equal beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. Again, with just the knowledge that I shared with him, my law enforcement friend observed that the case is  probably at a dead end now. Three plus years is a long time. I wondered at what point does the killer say to himself (or herself) "I got away with it!"
Duker

A new suspect?

I don't generally put much credence in the "talk on the street" because it is usually just that. However, in this case, there just may be some truth (or a degree of truth) to this.
Assuming my novelist mode with its perenial "what if" question, what if, just for the sake of  argument/discussion, there is a third person out there? He/she might have fallen off the police radar as they zeroed in on the most logical suspects. What if, heaven befall us, it is a female? What if this person had the motive, means and opportunity to kill Stacey Burns? I assume that any of these "peripheral" people have been eliminated from consideration due to the careful, judicious and thorough investigation, but in my mind, wouldn't it be a huge suprise if Ed Burns and Jim Vittum suddenly were not suspects in the murder of Stacey Burns?
Sorry, I let my fiction writer take over there but as long as there are no arrests nor trial not convictions, we can speculate!
Just thinking but the "talk on the street is. . ."
Duker

Time To Repeat

It is time to reiterate some of my own "truths" for those who have been following this blog. These are my opinions formed while working on Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns.
1. I began this blog with the best of intentions. Simply put, I thought it might help to keep interest in the case alive. I'm not sure if it is accomplishing that purpose.
2. Naively, I thought that people would a) be truthful, b) be enthusiastic about this project and c) be open-minded. I should have been more realistic.
3. I still feel quite strongly that the authorities could be more forthcoming without jeopardizing the investigation, thereby relieving some of the stress and frustration found in the general public.
4. I also feel quite strongly that supposed details of this crime have somehow "leaked" into public knowledge, leading to potentially damaging  rumor, innuendo and speculation.
5. Finally (for today) I will say that this has, by far, been the most difficult challenge I've undertaken as a writer but I enjoying it and am determined to see it through to its conclusion.
Duker

Conspiracies

People love conspiracies. Sometimes conspiracies seem to be the only way to make sense of an otherwise senseless world. They can provide reason where there is no reason, logic where there is no logic, and hope where there is no hope. By spreading the blame around, a conspiracy can explain away the awful truth that there are evil, amoral and depraved individuals in the world, individuals who are more than capable of wreaking havoc all by themselves.
Here are just a couple of the conspiracy theories I've heard that concern the Stacey Burns murder. Remember, by its most popular definition, a theory is a hypothesis or unproven statements. Maybe that explains why they are so much fun!
1. What about the "theory" that there will never be a trial in this case because there are influential people living in Wolfeboro who will not let that happen for fear of what will be exposed?
2. What about the "theory" that the investigation was botched from the very beginning and the reason why there has not been an arrest is that mistakes were made early on, mistakes that would allow a guilty person to "walk" if a trial was held.
3. What about the "theory" that at least three people, maybe even more, had the motive, means and opportunity to carry out this horrendous crime?
Many of these "theories" could be immediately dismissed by the authorities who have chosen to remain pretty much silent. Whether any of them have a "degree of truth" or no truth whatsoever remains to be seen.
Visit the many blog posts (not here) that talk about the murders of Bobbie Miller and Stacey Burns and you'll find more theories. The trouble is that speculation, hypothesizing and flat-out guessing about who did what generally does not help the cause. What will help this cause is the truth, told by people who know it.

Murder in a Small Town

Enough people have asked me to update them on the progress of "Murder in a Small Town: The Tragic Death of Stacey Burns" that I feel I should do just that.
First, a correction: I believe in my last post, I made an error with the name of Ed Burns' alibi person. It is Michael Brabant, not Bravance. If this is not right either, I'm sure someone out there will let me know.
Now, to the progress on the book: Sixteen chapters are written. I am currently working on Chapter Seventeen entitled "Motive, Means and Opportunity," a fairly lengthy chapter which examines this mantra of homicide detectives in relationship to just two "persons of interest" although recently obtained information indicates that perhaps I should be including at least two others as well.
After this chapter is completed, there are just two left to be written: "Arrest" and "Trial and Conviction."
Obviously, revisions have been necessary and are ongoing as I gather new information or people who would not talk to me before have now done so.
Will a publisher handle the book without a conclusion? Probably not! Does that mean the book will never get published if an arrest is never made? Possibly, but I have an idea for releasing it chapter by chapter as an e-book if it has to go that route.
My integrity and credibility is very important to me. I have promised people I've interviewed that they will see what I've written and will be able to check everything for truth and accuracy before publication in any form. This is sometimes an unwieldy process as it involves communications back and forth but I feel it is worth it.
For those who asked (and even for those who didn't) this is where the book stands now.
To those who would like to provide information, I am very easy to find on this blog, on Facebook, on www.dukesouthard.com and in Green Valley, Arizona. There are some people out there who could help fill in the narrative and help me tell Stacey's story accurately if they chose to do so.
Duker

Certainties: A Satire

Students in my English classes of years ago knew that I loved satire. (Perhaps some of them even remember that fact!)Iin keeping with my love of satire,  I'd like to list a few certainties I've discovered regarding the Stacy Burns case.
1. The police have analyzed every surveillance recording with time of activity from the hotel where Ed Burns spent Saturday night with Micheal Bravance, including hallways, elevators, lobbies, parking areas and garages. Therefore, they are certain that his alibi is unassailable.
2. The police have cleared any potential female "person of interest," thereby negating any rumors and or gossip which continue to circulate through the town about possible female involvement in the crime.
3. The police thoroughly searched the houses of Jim Vittum's parents and his ex-wife along with his car, his lake barge and any aircraft which he may have able to access.
4. Any and all specific details of the crime have been kept under the tightest security, especially those details only the killer would know. No newspaper reporter, no television investigative reporter and certainly no writer has had access to any of those details. Certainly, neither has there been any sharing of anything that might impact the open, active and ongoing investigation with the public in general.
In a later blog, we'll hear about other certainties in this case.
Sorry to have missed my scheduled day with this blog. Yesterday somehow got away from me.
Duker     

Investigative Journalist? (Not!)

What a big surprise to learn that writing in the "true crime" genre is not the same as writing in the memoir/non-fiction genre! One would think I would have known that but, as usual, I let my romantic notions get in the way of reality.
Facts are facts and truth is truth; therefore, writing true crime is just like writing other non-fiction. What a mistaken assumption that was (is) on my part. What I discovered and continue to discover is that when fear and mistrust enter in, the normal good nature and sound judgement of human beings become clouded with suspicion and wariness.
I am not a trained investigative journalist, the Mike Wallace type that exposes fraud and lies and corruption. If someone tells me something, I tend to believe it. Writing about the Stacey Burns case has taught me some hard lessons, which is a good thing because a hard lesson learned is not forgotten. Perhaps the most significant lesson, so far, is that people who expose themselves by speaking out tend to absorb the most criticism, often being the target of accusations that are not always based on fact but on emotion.
There can be only one truth. There are not degrees of truth, as in, "his statement contained a degree of truth."
If his statement had just a degree of truth, wouldn't that necessarily mean that it also had a degree of untruth?
We know there is only one truth about what happened to Stacey Burns and her killer knows that truth.
I'm not an investigative journalist but I'm trying like so many others to discover that one truth through writing this book.
Duker  

Another reason:Re: Stacey Burns

OK- I admit it! Another reason I was drawn to writing this book is because I lived a half mile from Nancy and Norm Vittum and have known them since we moved to Tuftonboro in 1970. Imagine, forty years as neighbors and friends! I've respected and admired them for every one of those years, even as we drifted apart a bit in the latter part of our time in Tboro.
Now, imagine knowing Jim Vittum, their son, for every one of those forty years: having him in a class; seeing him in our beloved church; watching his children grow up; thinking for sure that there is no way he could ever have done this horrific crime. Then, imagine that you begin to think that maybe he could have done it
Now, imagine that you decide to write the book and you talk to agents about it and the first thing they say is STAY NEUTRAL!! So, you do and decide to "let the chips fall where they may" to fall back into the cliche trap!
That's what this book is hopefully ALL about! Just the truth- which shouldn't be that hard but believe me, it is! Anyone who knows me hopefully will believe that. Just the truth-someone, even it is only the killer, knows who it guilty. If you have the least bit of conscience left, give it up and let people move on.
My heart aches for Nancy and Norm. They are wonderful, caring people.
Duker

Why a book about Stacey Burns?

Via the infamous and cliched "grapevine" I hear the legitimate question asked enough that it should be answered. This blog will be Part I of the answer to the question: Why would you write a book about the Stacey Burns case? This question is the kind that is usually asked when the person asking already has a pre-conceived notion about what the answer should be but that does not make it any less legitimate.
Unspoken most of the time but always lurking is the follow-up question: How could you think of making money on such a tragedy?
Let's answer the follow-up first. Should this book ever be published in any format, I'm not planning on benefiting financially. If anyone does benefit, it will be the children of Stacey Burns through the foundation which has already been established for them. With that out of the way, let's move on to the question of why would I write this book.
We lived in Tuftonboro, New Hampshire for forty years. I taught in the Governor Wentworth School District for sixteen years and in Conway for ten. The area is home to us despite our retirement move to Arizona. We were still in NH when Stacey Burns was murdered. I saw first hand the pain, anguish and impact her death had on people I knew very well. I have written memoir and non-fiction and thought I could do the research this book and present an impartial, fair and accurate picture of the events connected to this horrendous crime. From everything I had heard about Stacey Burns and the incredible positive impact she had on so many people, I thought she deserved to have her story told as well.
I am a writer and writers want to write.This story ached to be told and I thought this was a chance to follow that writing passion for a good cause.
Part 2 of why I am writing this book will be the subject of the next blog.  

Calling all citizens

Please excuse a small bit of venting today as I express disappointment with those investigating the Stacey Burns murder case.
After over two years of exploring this case, interviewing any number of people close to it, researching all kinds of background material and writing fifteen chapters of a book about it, I recently offered to share and compare information I have with that of the investigators. I did this after attending the "walk for Stacey" in Concord on May 10. I did not ask to compromise their investigation; the offer was as an interested citizen who may or may have relevant information. I sent this offer via e-mail to the NH State Police with a cc to the Wolfeboro Police Department. Hearing only a "thank you keeping me informed" from the Wolfeboro Police Chief (who does not have jurisdiction in the case) I sent the same request to the NH Cold Case division which, I understand, has conducted interviews in Wolfeboro. To date, I've not had a response of any kind. I'm just wondering why? Would a thank you for your interest note or call be in order?
I just thought that there may be something in my notes or recordings that might help.
Has anyone else had an experience like this?
Duker  

Whom do you believe?

For of those anxiously awaiting the next question- here it is!
When two people whom you trust tell two different stories,which one do you believe? It happens all the  time in friendships, families and just acquaintances.
In the Stacey Burns case, it is imposing a monumental dilemma for me.
This is for information of anyone interested.
It is not an easy answer!
Duker

"We Know Who Did It"

During the two years I've been working on the Stacey Burns book, I've lost track of the times I've heard someone say "I know who did it." This statement comes from a wide variety of sources, including speculative blogs, hearsay rumors and unsubstantiated innuendo. These sources are easily dismissed. However, most troubling of all, there are indications from official sources that they "know who did it" but lack the evidence to make an arrest. What inference could we draw from what Jeffrey Strelzin, prosecutor for the Attorney General's Office, told the Keane family on the morning of the "Stacey Burns march" of May 10 that they are looking at "one guy" but "we haven't reached a point where we can make an arrest?" I guessing that it means the they do indeed know who did it. (At least, it seems that they think they know who did it!)
These are not just recent claims. I first heard a year ago last April that they knew who did it.
So, my question for today is just this: What exactly does it mean when we are told this is "still being pursued as an active case?" Does it mean ten hours a week? five? forty? Just curious . . .
By the way, for those who have wondered why I am doing this, I have a list of about nine reasons for a later blog. In the meantime, know that should this book ever be published, I plan on donating a substantial portion of any net proceeds to the foundation for Stacey's children.
Duker

Nothing new

Today's question will have to wait until tomorrow as I will hopefully be speaking with someone today who might trigger a fresh question for everyone.
To anyone reading this blog, I ask for patience if you came here expecting another question to be available but I will ask a little one and then tomorrow add something of more substance.
Does anyone out there think there is still a bit of a fear factor existing because the murderer of Stacey Burns has not been incarcerated?

A NH State Police question

First of all, thanks to Bob T. for the great explanation of the process following a 911 call. As I mentioned in the last blog, my question was not intended to reflect negatively on the wonderful officers and volunteers who  fulfill so well the responsibility to respond to emergencies. It is a difficult job and I respect and admire those who do it. I guess we must assume that all those well-thought out protocols were followed in the Stacey Burns case even during the chaos that must have been rampant at that scene.
My question for today seems to me to be an easy one to answer as well. It has to do with alibis and for today I'll raise the case of Ed Burns. Here it is with some background first. On 20/20, we see a video recording which seems to show Mr. Burns dancing at a party on Saturday night in a hotel in Massachusetts. That video is followed by a brief interview with a friend who says he was with Ed Burns all night through into Sunday morning. Hence, Ed Burns must have what is called in clicheville an "air-tight" alibi. I'll have more in later blogs about that Saturday night/Sunday morning with Mr. Bravance but for now, I ask this simple question to the authorities in New Hampshire: If Mr. Ed Burns has this fool proof alibi, why not let him and the rest of the population know that he is not a suspect in the murder of Stacey Burns? Declare him cleared and blow away the cloud of suspicion which remains over his head. Make an announcement that at least one "person of interest" is no longer in that category. Let Mr. Burns walk the streets of Wolfeboro without wondering if some people are still looking at him as a possible murderer.
This seems to me to make perfect sense if he is off the suspect list. It has been over three years, after all.  

First responders

In what must have been a horrific scene at the home of Stacey Burns on Sunday morning, Mothers' Day, May 10, 2009, one has to wonder how the first EMT's and other first responders reacted. With the highest regard and admiration for what they do, I am worried that today's question may be taken in the wrong way. It is not my intention to criticize or question what happened on that awful morning. My question is a simple one and, once again, because of the status of the investigation, no one will likely be willing to answer it but I'll raise it since there is a hole my description of Sunday morning in the book.
My question for today: Was everyone who arrived at the house that morning aware of what they were going to find or to what they were responding? I ask this only in the interest of establishing that all of the protocols for handling a crime scene were firmly in place before anyone entered the house. I'm sure they were. I assume the response to a medical emergency like a heart attack must be different than the response to a stabbing or murder.
Duke

An Ed Burns question

Although attention to this blog so far has been somewhat sparse, to say the least, I hold out hope that maybe someone is at least reading it, even if there is no comment.
My two questions today are really easy ones. One which I should have asked long ago is what is the name of the hotel in Boston where Ed Burns spent Saturday night, the night that Stacey was killed?
The second one could only be answered by Ed Burns but I sure there are as many opinions as there are people out there! Here it is: Why, after picking up the three girls on Friday then realizing that you had a prior commitment for the weekend, didn't you just return the girls to their mother for Mothers' Day weekend?
Wednesday's discussion and question will center on the first responders to Stacey's house after they received the 911 call.
Duker

A John Quinones question

On the 20/20 show of January, 2010, John Quinones interviewed a number of the same people I have interviewed. I sent Mr. Quinones a certified letter which was signed for in May, 2011. In that letter, I expressed my surprise that he (John Quinones) had been given a detail about the crime which I felt should never have been made public. I asked for a simple yes or no answer as to whether it was true that he told Jim Vittum about that detail during his interview. If he did, then he shouldn't have known that fact. If he didn't, then Jim Vittum's credibility suffers. Of course, he never responded. Once again, we are left to speculate rather than sorting out the truth.
So, here is my question for John Quinones: Did the police investigators provide you with information that you could use in the interview process, information which I've been told is off-limits to the general public? If so, why would they do that and jeopardize the investigation? If not, who did provide you the information?
It seems to me that these are legitimate questions, given that information coming forth from the authorities about the case has been sparse, to say the least.
Duker