burying evidence

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:33 am

Maybe this has been addressed before, but I'd like to know why the hell they allowed clothing, rug pieces, etc. to be buried? Even in that day when forensics wasn't all that developed, it would seem to me that they would realize something might come up in a trial or whatever that would make the police want to take another look at something.

Tina-Kate · Post by **Tina-Kate** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:42 pm

I'm thinking that was still a time when respect for the dead outweighed any thought of preserving possible evidence. Now, this goes against the fact the bodies themselves were viewed & prodded, the house open to all & sundry who had a smidgen of authority, etc. But it seems Morse may have made use of the "respect for the dead" angle to have his way. However, whether or not Morse was really thinking this way is another question.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 4:30 pm

I have often wondered if Morse did not take this opportunity to try and bury evidence that might have pointed to the identity of the murderer.

FairhavenGuy · Post by **FairhavenGuy** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 9:54 pm

The short answer as to why evidence was buried is that three-quarters of the investigators on this case appear to have been complete boobs and another 24% were bloody idiots.

Harrington gets points for his description of the pink wrapper. . .

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Wed Dec 22, 2004 1:59 am

FairhavenGuy I like your attitude.