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