adrien_j9 said:
No, they never interviewed me.
They never interviewed a witness to a violent death and possible homicide?????????? Then you have a legitimate complaint. If you saw something that doesn't jibe with the official version then without question gnaw on it like a dog with an old bone. Hire a lawyer, write congressman,senators,prosecutors,newspapers, and crawl up their asses so far they smell your hair spray.
But be prepared for hard questions, investigators digging into your past, Eriks past, and be prepared for the making of enemies that will last a lifetime. Personally, if it was me and I saw an injustice in the investigation of a friends murder? I'll look the devil in the eye and tell him to get fucked. I'm 47yo, have peaked in my profession, and don't much give a damn.
But you have to weigh it. You have to weigh what you saw that night; you have to weigh how high you were; you have to weigh what Eriks actions were. But frankly for the Police to have not interviewed a material witness is inexcusable. What we do is immediately separate everyone, dont allow them to talk to each other, and conduct separate interviews with each witness. We will often fill a Public Bus with witnesses, station an officer on the bus, and enforce the no talk order. And we have every right to detain a witness as long as we need to, even to charge them with interfering with an investigation if they do not answer questions. A dead body on the street is a serious thing. Even then you get many conflicting accounts of the incident. Most of all when people have been drinking, were high, or have a personal relationship with either offender or victim.
Theres a ton I don't know about this. And I'm in no position to make any judgments. But I cannot understand why a material witness wasn't interviewed. There is no statute of limitations on homicide, only the rule of double jeopardy. And that only applies when someone is found innocent in a court of law, and cannot be re-tried for the same crime. There was no trial in this case, which means it can easily be re-opened.
Which leads to the questions, "were your own observations clouded by your personal relationship with the victim,or, by booze or drugs"? IF? This victim was down on the ground,helpless, no longer a threat, and still beaten with a deadly weapon? Then its homicide, probably in the form of manslaughter. If this is the case then you have a legitimate beef and should pursue it. If you do pursue it, and I would if these were the facts, then get used to the questions your hearing from me because your going to hear them a lot more.
Personally? If I thought my friend was killed by homicide and the authorities dropped the ball? I'd never "let it go".........Rich
