You are making an assumption this is an active case. It's not. It's a 16 year-old ice cold case with police and volunteers working this and a hundred other cases simultaneously. Therefore, to assume inactivity means someone is cleared would not be accurate.
Insofar as "Billy" is concerned, the group that first wondered about him went to the police many many months prior to his alias ever being put in print. They were met with, yes, inactivity. All they really wanted the police to do was ask the running man witness to look at a picture of Billy wearing his favorite loose-fitting green jacket. Had this witness said "sorry, not the guy" or even "sorry, not the jacket", then case closed on Billy. Seems like a logical request, right? Had this witness ruled out Billy way back then, that's the last he'd have been mentioned. Rather, it was the inactivity and the frustration that went along with it that ended up making Billy's name bantered about from person to person and finally in print. To be clear, the action taken was a function of the inactivity, not a function of whether the guy was dead or alive.
You bring up the palm print on the Fresca bottle. We've known about that for more than a decade. We've had the tip of the murder weapon for more than a decade. We've been asking for the print to be DNA tested, and for the knife to be exactly determined from its metal composition... to no avail. So if zero analysis of the evidence itself has been done (more inactivity), how on earth can we assume any extrapolations have to have also been done?
Lastly, yes, there's a flurry of activity every year around 12/4, the anniversary of her death. But, yes, this year the volume has been amped up. For those of us who want this solved, that's a good thing. I'll be at the meeting in New Haven that day to see if anything comes of it. But as these meetings are usually one-way (i.e. the police solicit info, not share), I'm not expecting anything earth shattering.
- Jeff |
