Most murder mysteries begin with a body, suspects, and weapons. This one will be different. I’m going to toss into the mix these things: the body, the weapon, the suspects, and the evidence they committed the crime. My goal here is to put two people in a position where they might or might not serve time if the body is found. Unless indicated otherwise, all scenarios have the same evidence and circumstances.
The first scenario is easy. The body is found. But missing is the weapon. The suspects are a man and his wife. There are a lot of texts and photos to indicate the wife was having an affair with the victim. The husband came home early from work the night of the murder. The wife claims she had a date that night with the victim, but he stood her up. The husband claims his gun was stolen a while back, but he never reported it. The house has been cleaned to the point there’s no blood evidence. The couple have gotten a lawyer and are not talking at all.
Two: The body is found. No weapon, same suspects, everything is the same, but in this case, a shoe, the same size the woman wears, was found in the grave. Credit Card records show the victim bought the shoe on the same day the wife missed work.
Three: same as Two, but this time, a piece of customized jewelry was found, with the wife’s first name engraved on it.
Four: Same as all the others, but the gun is found in a creek. The barrel had been filed out, the firing pin ground down, so while the same caliber of gun used in the murder was owned by the suspects, there’s no way to link this gun to the murder.
Five: A woman claiming to be a psychic said, before the body was found, she saw the body being buried, saw the gun being thrown in the creek, and knew who committed the murders. She said all of this before the body was found, and no one would listen to her.
I’m thinking none of this, from one to five, is enough to prosecute the married couple for anything. While it’s compelling evidence that something nefarious happened, I mean other than the man with a bullet hole in his chest, taking this to a jury means twelve out of twelve jurors would have to agree, beyond reasonable doubt, these two people, or one of these two people, killed the man and hid the body.
The footwear and the jewelry could be explained by the wife claiming she gave the necklace back to him days before. The shoe could belong to anyone with that foot size. There’s no direct evidence the gun owned by the husband was used to murder his wife’s lover.
At the same time, if all this evidence could be produced, both man and wife would be guilty in the eyes of the public for as long as they lived in that town.
But you are the District Attorney, how would you go about trying to prosecute these two?
Mike writes regularly at his site: The Hickory Head Hermit.
Opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the management of this site.