Part 2; also Asguard, Xev
Without a Trace, pt. 2 (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)
Through hundreds of interviews and analysis of hundreds of police reports and information in three state computer databases, the P-I found that police statewide routinely botch or ignore missing-person cases, even when there are ample indications of foul play. As a result, families have been left with unanswered questions, countless dead have been buried without a name and killers have been allowed to roam free.
In the Hindman case, proper investigation might have prevented more bloodshed. The sheriff's chief detective and the county prosecutor have long suspected they were killed by their landlord, Jim Lowry, after an argument about money. But without bodies, they had no case.
In 1994, Lowry crept into a trailer on his land and shot a different tenant in the head after they argued about money. That man survived.
Part two of a local newspaper series.
Asguard--I do not believe there is a statute of limitations of murder. I don't understand the context of the issue.
Xev--I think though the hard truth is that it's becoming more and more representative. Seattle recently took some embarrassing heat after frustrated commuters taunted and jeered a bridge-jumper, encouraging her to jump so they could get the fuck to work. Incidents like this speak to the priorities of people, and the frequency with which they occur lends us some idea of how common such sentiments are among society. Whether it's the failure of a clerk to call police after sighting a missing woman, a police officer's failure to
do his job, a menagerie watching a rape on the roadside, or otherwise, we're seeing either an increase in these incidents or an increase in the acknowledgment of these issues. It's a bit of a disturbing trend. Consider cruise ships with viral infections and restaurants with
E. coli outbreaks. For a while, it was unclear if the rising number of
E. coli tales in the Western US represented a rise in incident rates or changes in (A) public reporting structures, and (B) priorities of news editors. Presently, I have the same questions about the number of cruise ships coming to port with half their fares dog-sick. And it seems fair to consider whether (A) there is an increase in these kinds of events, or (B) there is more focus on these events (much like child abductions in 2002).
As to why ....? I wouldn't want to untangle the psychology of it. But part of it at least might actually be boredom. I mean, wars are terrible, but even I like to sit back with beer and nachos and watch the CNN lightshow. And when I stop to think of some of the video images I've watched merely because they were there in front of me ... I can't say I'm pleased with the notion that I would stand by and watch a crime occur, so I hope it's a different outcome if it ever comes up. But I've watched suicides, murders, accidental deaths, equine fellatio, and a host of other sick things before merely because I was bored and didn't have to go far. I would like to point out, though, that while I watch, I can't exactly laugh at a chick blowing a horse,and I can't exactly laugh at someone getting their face blown off. But that ties in well with my next point of speculation: am I not frequently openly horrified by a perceived lack of human sympathy in my neighbors? Can I imagine my neighbors standing around watching something like that go on? Some of them, yes. Can I imagine my neighbors ignoring a murder? Some of them, yes. Why? They're bored; this is the only show going. I have, in the past, had to look at a friend and say, "Now, someone has just emptied a firearm at me and one of your employees--can you give me a reason other than your lines of crank on the bar that I
shouldn't call the police?" People have some strange notions in their heads. Maybe Joe doesn't want to interfere because the cops might somehow find the coke in his pocket. Maybe Jill has an outstanding warrant for a hit-and-run suspicion. Perhaps Jim is afraid of being sued--he's heard about a guy who performed CPR for a heart attack victim and was sued by the widow for millions because he couldn't save the guy. Maybe Tom over there swears by the old tales of a career burglar who sued a homeowner for "lost wages" after falling down the stairs in the middle of a robbery. Maybe Theresa and Chuck are having an affair, and don't want to get involved because their families might find out.
Something you might be familiar with: It used to be that friends of mine would prevent me from intervening in bad situations taking place in front of me. One circle of associates seriously avoided getting involved in situations for various fears; nothing like a rape or murder has ever come up before. But
concerts changed that; club shows, especially. Take Floater, for instance, who abhor violence at their shows. Vocalist Rob Wynia is known to berate combatants as security hauls them off the floor. Now, Floater fans
love their band. After two or three occasions of feeling young again, jumping into moshpit fights and hauling puppydog drunks off each other, I can say that one of these friends of mine finally remembered why we intervene in situations. These days, he berates me if I don't do enough for someone. It's been a full 180 that has taken
several years to concretize.
And what's even worse is that on those occasions that something does happen and people do assist or intervene, I've noticed this sort of confused, blinking look afterward where people just sort of look at each other and say, "Well, I thought
you ....." So there's something about the herd mentality there, as well, but no, I can't figure it entirely.
thanx,
Tiassa
