Quote:
Originally Posted by FAX
Totally possible. In fact, it apparently happens all the time.
I've watched several episodes of some cable television program I ran across (48 hours or something like that) about homicide detectives. In fact, I posted something about it awhile back.
Anyhow, the program is about how real-life homicide detectives have about 48 hours to get a lead or the odds of solving the murder decrease dramatically. Over and over again, they are only able to solve the crime because they either have an eye witness or video tape or photography taken at the time. Otherwise, people get away with murder constantly.
It seems as though you have to A) Make sure there are no witnesses - human or otherwise, B) Get rid of the murder weapon, C) Have a reasonable alibi, and D) Have an attorney present during questioning. And, obviously, it's a good idea not to leave any DNA evidence behind.
But, if you do those things and refuse to confess, the likelihood of getting away with murder is actually pretty good ... or so it appears. The detectives on this show are good at berating perps to the point that they confess. Other than that, it's not like CSI ... at all.
FAX
|
Hmm. Interesting. I think maybe the crime shows make me think that it's all space-age now and that it's hard to get away without leaving some evidence that can be traced and it sounds like that's not the case.
I bet if it was a really, really high-profile murder like a senator or celebrity getting killed (bigger than Nicole Brown), a big city or the FBI might be able to do the space-age stuff, but if a normal sixpack person gets murdered they don't have the budget or staff to do it.
And while I'm thinking about it, is "space-age" still a reasonable adjective to describe something that's ultra-modern? The apex of the space age was over 40 years ago. In my mind it still sounds cutting edge, but is it? Should I really be saying "Curiosity Age" or "Drone Age" or "Wristborne GPS Age"?