There was an article in the local newspaper today that fascinates me.
Seven years ago a college student disappeared on her way home from a party. Her body was never found nor was direct evidence discovered to suggest that harm had come to her. A person of interest was identified in the case but he was never arrested. Popular opinion was he killed her and would be charged as soon as the body turned up. In the meantime, he was charged and convicted of crimes he committed elsewhere. He has been in prison since.
Now, a judge has ruled the state has shown it has enough evidence to charge him with first-degree murder even though there's no body and no evidence of foul play. First they’ll have to prove there was a death, then they’ll have to prove it was the result of foul play, and finally that it was a premeditated act. How in the world can they do that without a body? And can I watch them try?
I cannot wait to see how this unfolds.
Word came down through Facebook Messenger that Easter will be at my cousin’s daughter’s house. That makes her a cousin, too, but it seems less ambiguous to state it like this. Now begins the dilemma of finding a side dish that will still be appetizing after an hour-plus drive and that most will like. Or, maybe I should take a jello salad. It’s probably time for me to become that relative.
My vote: rolls. They travel well and you can heat them up in a few minutes once you get there.
ReplyDeleteAbout the other thing -- I can see how they can get around lack of a body, but no evidence of foul play? I wonder if that just means they don't have forensic evidence. Maybe the guy wrote something down or told someone what he did. Either way, very interesting. I hope the family gets some closure after all this time.