Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Murder Mystery: Who Killed Yale Student Suzanne Jovin? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (1008)	11/24/2001 12:17:46 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Respond to of 1397

Re: 11/23/01 - Hartford Courant: How Long Will He Be A Suspect? EDITORIALS How Long Will He Be A Suspect? November 23, 2001 New Haven police have much to answer for with regard to their investigation of the killing of Yale University senior Suzanne Jovin three years ago. Nor has Yale exactly covered itself in glory. Ms. Jovin was found dead with 17 stab wounds in the East Rock section of the city on Dec. 4, 1998. Four days later, police questioned James Van de Velde, the dead woman's thesis adviser, for hours. He was named a suspect. To date, no arrests have been made. A month after Ms. Jovin's death, Yale officials cited their belief that it would be "disruptive" for Mr. Van de Velde to continue as a lecturer. They canceled his spring 1999 classes. Later, they refused to renew his contract. This was done even though Mr. Van de Velde had not been arrested and no evidence had surfaced linking him to the killing. Subsequent investigations failed to unearth proof that his relationship with Ms. Jovin prior to her death had been inappropriate. On Oct. 26, New Haven State's Attorney Michael Dearington revealed that DNA taken from under Ms. Jovin's fingernails did not match a DNA sample provided months ago by Mr. Van de Velde. Still, Mr. Dearington has said that no suspect can be eliminated merely because his DNA does not match. True enough. But the DNA test results strengthen Mr. Van de Velde's claim that he is innocent and has been treated unfairly. Three years on, Mr. Van de Velde remains in a dreadful place, as does the Jovin family. Justice has not been done, especially to the victim. Although it is possible that Mr. Van de Velde is connected to the crime, the simple fact is that police have not charged him with anything. His guilt has not been established in a court of law. Yet he continues to carry the stigma of being named a suspect by the police. That has robbed him of his reputation and impacted his livelihood. Mr. Van de Velde says he has been cooperative with investigators from the beginning. He says he offered to provide a DNA sample the night he was questioned soon after the slaying, but his offer was turned down. He apparently passed a lie detector test conducted by a former FBI agent, but police won't recognize those results. Nor, says the suspect, will police communicate with him or his lawyer or respond to his request that he be cleared. He wants an apology from New Haven Police Chief Melvin H. Wearing and has called for an independent investigation of the department. The demand for an apology aside, there should be an investigation of this troubled inquiry. If there was incompetence or criminal negligence by officials conducting the probe, it should be uncovered. Neither the public nor the Jovin family is being served as the trail grows cold. And Mr. Van de Velde deserves better. In America, sometimes a guilty person goes free because the state can't make its case. Far worse, however, is convicting an innocent person or ruining his life by innuendo. Three years after naming Mr. Van de Velde a suspect in a terrible crime, the New Haven Police Department has a duty to charge him or remove the stigma. ctnow.com