unsolved crimes

[Lao Tzu]

It seems like virtually every high profile violent crime goes unsolved. the simpson murders, Jon Benet, the sniper shooting, the bonny blake killing, and alot of others. Even though supposedly 80% of all murders are solved, i guess public ones have a much lower %.


What effect will this have on the tv viewing population? most of us get our idea of how the world works via tv, so constantly being told that no one is caught for violent crimes is going to result in some draconian penalties soon (at least i think) combined with more police power to investigate crimes. Even though violent crime really doesn't affect suburbia (disprove me if you can), they are told that it does by the tv, and told that no one is captured for it by the tv.

Is our crime policy dictated by tv? crime dramas & high profile crimes where no conviction/arrest results?

 

[starfish]

I think the Simpson murder was solved. He just got away with it.

Jon Benet... Who knows with that one. Really strange.

 

[Puc]

that is true supernav.... but the DA's have a baser response. they charge people with every conceivable crime, and see what winds up sticking.

it is a shitty response to a shitty predicament.

they are not without culpabiliity....

look at AI... prosecutor charged him with 20 some odd crimes.

 

[biteme]

don't forget the chandra levy case, also unsolved (even though i'm sure condit had a role in it).

problem is...it's *real* easy to kill someone in this country and get away with it. Unless you're stupid enough to leave fingerprints or get caught on camera or someone sees...there's no way to prove you did it. You could have used an atm right at the scene 5 minutes b4, or had a fight with that person the night b4..but still does NOT prove that you commited the crime. That's just how our system works. Unfortunately, it's setup to help the criminal more often than not. Any D.A. will tell you it's real difficult to get convictions these days with all these fancy dancy lawyers they got.

-= nav =-

I don't know about that. If a there's a motive and a person is a suspect, they have techniques now where they can find a person's dna, hair, clothing fibers. The hard ones to solve is when there is no suspect. Stranger on stranger crimes.

 

[Zerxes]

The trouble with "Stranger on Stranger" Crimes is that there is no point of origin to begin an official investigation, as there would be if say there was a spouse or a signifigant other involved. In other words, there is no link between victim and perp. Look at cases such as Ted Bundy for example. All his crimes were stranger on stranger. The ONLY reason he got caught, was because he slipped up and left suspicious items in his VW Bug, that led Police in Utah(during a routine traffic stop) to suspect that he might have something to do with missing girls in that area. If he were more carefull, he might have been on the streets for alot longer than he ended up being, because it was not due to any police techniques that led to his capture. Now if you want to talk about convicting him, then that's another story. The problem with cases like the D.C Sniper is though, they have to catch the guy PRACTICALLY red-handed to be able to use said evidence. Not an easy task.

 

[PHATchik]

In the case of my friend that was murdered last spring, the men who did it are in jail awaiting their trial. On robbery charges. They haven't even been charged with his murder, even though their confessions basically say they did it. One of the men led police to his body at the end of July. The police identified him. The men are being charged with the robbery in which my friend's car was hijacked and used. Yet they can't charge them with murder? The DA said that they have to wait for forensic evidence and that could take months. In other words, they will get off scot free as far as his murder goes. It's not been mentioned in a month.