How Our Society Has Become
I have blogged a few cases lately, as well as seen a few others on television, that have said to me that society has become one that when an unexpected, or suspicious death occurs that someone has to be blamed, whether the evidence is there or not.
In the two cases I have blogged (the Adam Kaufman murder trial and the Ronda Reynolds death case) investigators charged or attempted to charge the spouse of the person who passed away. In both cases there were allegations of mis-conduct by the investigators. In the case of Ronda Reynolds, the prosecutors have refused to press charges even though even the county coroner issued warrants for the arrest of Ronda's husband and stepson. In the Adam Kaufman case, charges were filed, and even a trial followed in which he was acquitted. I saw another case last night of a woman who was convicted in the poisoning death of her husband, yet there seemed to be little evidence to which conclusively pointed to her and some say more evidence pointed to her son. Still yet there were allegations of an improper investigation and it has recently come into question as to results of tests that were done and the lack of tests that should have been done.
There are those in the Ronda Reynolds case who believe her death was a suicide, which has been the largest contention in the case. The circumstances, as well as an improperly contained and treated crime scene has made it nearly impossible to prove whether her death was in fact a homicide or suicide. When it comes to the Kaufman case, there were early questions as to whether her death was an allergic reaction to a spray tan she had received the day before. While that allegation could not be proven (or dis-proven) it seems that proof that his wife suffered from dizzy and fainting spells were largely ignored by investigators.
I even heard of a case recently in which a husband was charged with the murder of his wife and it was later determined that she had not only committed suicide but had actually planned it to set the husband up. Yet, it took the defense to prove that and find the witnesses.
It just seems as if we have come to a day and age where investigators feel the need to turn every death into a homicide, but not only that, it is as if they need to pin it on the closest person. It has always been common knowledge that when there truly is a homicide that the spouses (or lovers) are the first suspects in the case. That is totally reasonable considering the multitude of cases in which spouses have been involved, in one way or another. It seems that sometimes investigators forget that in the cases that were proven they had to go above and beyond simple forensics. When a spouse or lover is involved simple things like fingerprints or even sperm DNA is not sufficient. In many cases even DNA under a victims fingers may not be sufficient.
I have often wondered if something were to ever happen to my husband (who is already disabled, with a multitude of issues) if investigators would look my way. What if they were to scan my computer? They would find multiple searches made on different murder cases. Some I have done to blog about, others I have done just out of curiosity. Or what if something happened to me? Would he be able to prove the searches on the computer were from me? Over the last several years I have become allergic to more and more things. Some things I have not narrowed down as to what it is. One of the rarer allergies is to mineral oil (which means a multitude of things including anything with petroleum in it). Could he prove this? Would anyone look for that? Or would my own family be suspected in something that they were not responsible for?
I often wonder if this way of thinking has not come about because in time gone by children were raised to always respect the police and that they knew what was best and right. However, just like in every other areas of life there are good and bad apples, there are those so full of themselves and there are those who believe they are above the law and will commit illegal acts to prove their cases.
In the two cases I have blogged (the Adam Kaufman murder trial and the Ronda Reynolds death case) investigators charged or attempted to charge the spouse of the person who passed away. In both cases there were allegations of mis-conduct by the investigators. In the case of Ronda Reynolds, the prosecutors have refused to press charges even though even the county coroner issued warrants for the arrest of Ronda's husband and stepson. In the Adam Kaufman case, charges were filed, and even a trial followed in which he was acquitted. I saw another case last night of a woman who was convicted in the poisoning death of her husband, yet there seemed to be little evidence to which conclusively pointed to her and some say more evidence pointed to her son. Still yet there were allegations of an improper investigation and it has recently come into question as to results of tests that were done and the lack of tests that should have been done.
There are those in the Ronda Reynolds case who believe her death was a suicide, which has been the largest contention in the case. The circumstances, as well as an improperly contained and treated crime scene has made it nearly impossible to prove whether her death was in fact a homicide or suicide. When it comes to the Kaufman case, there were early questions as to whether her death was an allergic reaction to a spray tan she had received the day before. While that allegation could not be proven (or dis-proven) it seems that proof that his wife suffered from dizzy and fainting spells were largely ignored by investigators.
I even heard of a case recently in which a husband was charged with the murder of his wife and it was later determined that she had not only committed suicide but had actually planned it to set the husband up. Yet, it took the defense to prove that and find the witnesses.
It just seems as if we have come to a day and age where investigators feel the need to turn every death into a homicide, but not only that, it is as if they need to pin it on the closest person. It has always been common knowledge that when there truly is a homicide that the spouses (or lovers) are the first suspects in the case. That is totally reasonable considering the multitude of cases in which spouses have been involved, in one way or another. It seems that sometimes investigators forget that in the cases that were proven they had to go above and beyond simple forensics. When a spouse or lover is involved simple things like fingerprints or even sperm DNA is not sufficient. In many cases even DNA under a victims fingers may not be sufficient.
I have often wondered if something were to ever happen to my husband (who is already disabled, with a multitude of issues) if investigators would look my way. What if they were to scan my computer? They would find multiple searches made on different murder cases. Some I have done to blog about, others I have done just out of curiosity. Or what if something happened to me? Would he be able to prove the searches on the computer were from me? Over the last several years I have become allergic to more and more things. Some things I have not narrowed down as to what it is. One of the rarer allergies is to mineral oil (which means a multitude of things including anything with petroleum in it). Could he prove this? Would anyone look for that? Or would my own family be suspected in something that they were not responsible for?
I often wonder if this way of thinking has not come about because in time gone by children were raised to always respect the police and that they knew what was best and right. However, just like in every other areas of life there are good and bad apples, there are those so full of themselves and there are those who believe they are above the law and will commit illegal acts to prove their cases.
Comments
Post a Comment