Old Crimes, New Investigations

The original handling by the police of the shooting of Ms. Bishop's brother in Braintree has got to bother the current police. Clearly, something was wrong about how it was handled. After all in a continuation of that crime she ran to a car lot, pointed the same weapon at two men and demanded a car. Oh yeah, she told them she needed the car to get away from an abusive husband who was going to kill her. A flat out lie, which of course should have raised an eyebrow of the cops investigating the shooting.

This raises a whole bunch of questions, and not just for that cold case, but for 1000's of cold cases throughout the country. Should the Braintree police reopen the shooting case? Is there a benefit to closing a murder when the shooter is facing three homicides in another state? Can modern technology be used to better assess the three shots Bishop fired in the house? Are the men at the car lot's version of events being retold to the media today accurate or has time played tricks with their memory? Finally, what about those cases where the police either out of incompetence, laziness or corruption chose not to investigate-- should the victims' families be entitled to a new investigation conducted by better trained investigators, with better tools who actually care?

Lots of questions. Some more to throw in the mix. The New Mexico Supreme Court on Wednesday is to hear oral arguments in a challenge to the fact that New Mexico had a stature of limitations for first degree felonies, rape and murder until 1997. It was actually 1993, but then that was repealed and redone as 1997. The cold case units of the larger police departments will be most directly affected by the Court's decision.

Should the ability to run DNA or interview witnesses that suddenly come forward after many, many years be pursued to close out a case if there can be no prosecution? There is absolutely no doubt that new technology has the ability to free people wrongly convicted and to catch those that got away. What is the best path to take for our society as a whole? Should we close the door and say no prosecution based upon newly discovered evidence, while at the same time stepping up the ability to clear those wrongly convicted? These are very hefty matters with lots of consequences, both seen and unseen.

In many states there is no statute of limitations for any murder, 1st, 2nd or manslaughter. Are the lives of victims more valuable in those states than they are here in New Mexico? Further, is someone who raises a statute of limitations defense against being charged in fact waiving their fifth amendment right against self-incrimination? I think in someways that goes with the territory. And if they are in fact waiving that right, would it be fair to require an admission of guilt in order to use that defense? An admission of guilt would close the case, and everyone would know who did it. True, there would not be jail time so would that be punishment enough.

I believe that all cases should be investigated no matter when they occurred. What to do with that information is something all of us need to decide.

To learn more about investigations visit http://www.everydaydetective.com