My post ( A Reprise)  from June 1 did not receive wide distribution for some reason, so I’m repeating a bit of here along with some new observations.

Since June, 2012, I posted over five hundred and sixty times on this blog with about 85 % devoted to the Stacey Burns murder case. When the comments on these posts are added in, the result is over a thousand entries since this blog began.

Here is just another fresh observation, offered with the proviso that, as always, you can take it or leave it.

Don’t you wonder how the murderers of both Stacey Burns and Bobbie Miller could escape the intense, ongoing, thorough, and relentless investigations being conducted by the police, one for over nine years and the other approaching the same mark? Do these two women from the Lakes Region, slain within months and miles of each other, personify the efficiency of the NHSP Major Crime Unit or do they represent a justice system that has failed them by not prosecuting for fear of losing a case? I know the arguments. “We only get one chance” and ” a killer could walk free” if the evidence isn’t there.

However, I wonder if this is a valid question: Why wouldn’t the evidence be there after nine years of accumulating it? Probably not valid, right?

Have a good day!

Duke